SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1927 Supreme(Mad) 241

V.RAO
C. Thiruvengada Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
C. Thangavelu Mudaliar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. This is an application to enforce a compromise is a suit for partition. Defendants 1 to 7 make the application and it is resisted by the plaintiff The suit relates to a Hindu family consisting of three branches. The plaintiff is the sole representative of his branch; the 8th defendant represents another branch and the third branch is represented by the defendant 1 and sons, defendants 2 to 7. Defendant 8 allowed the suit to proceed ex parte and the compromise was only as between defendants 1 to 7 on the one hand and the plaintiff on the other.

2. The terms were reduced to writing and engrossed in Tamil on a stamp paper. The arrangement is an extremely simple one. The first defendant and his sons agreed to pay the plaintiff Rs. 8,000 in full settlement of his claim in the family properties. The deed says that the plaintiff was thereafter to have no concern with the properties of the family, with the outstandings due or the debts payable. Defendants 1 to 7 were to pay the amount of Rs. 8,000 within one month from the date of the decree. A charge was to be created on the properties for this sum and as defendants 5, 6 and 7 are minors, sanction of the Cour






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top