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

1929 Supreme(Mad) 558

CURGENVEN
(Illur) Ramayya Chetti – Appellant
Versus
Mannaru Chetti – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Curgenven, J.

1. By a so-called deed of release (Ex. 2) executed by the reversioner in 1882, property, including the suit house, was conveyed to the 5th defendant Narasamma, sister of the last male holder, and to her son defendant 1, then a minor, for a consideration of Rs. 200. From time to time since then defendant 1 has alienated portions of the property. This property consisted of two houses, a piece of wet and a piece of dry land. While he was still a minor his mother acting as his guardian sold one of the houses under Ex. D in 1885. In 1895 he himself sold one half of the suit house under Ex. C, a sale deed which his mother attested. The remaining half of the suit house was mortgaged in 1904 to the plaintiffs brother. To conclude with the alienations, he disposed of the nanja and punja lands under Exs. F, F (1) and G in 1908 and 1907.

2. The mortgaged portion of the house fell to the plaintiff in the family partition and he obtained a decree bringing the property to sale in 1921 and purchased it himself. When he attempted to obtain possession he was resisted by defendants 6 and 7, who are respectively the son-in-law and daughters son of Narasamma, defendant 5. They set







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