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

1930 Supreme(Mad) 5

EDDY
Ramaswami Chettiar Minor By Next – Appellant
Versus
P. M. A. Vellayappa Chettiar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Eddy, J.

1. It is a tribute to the learned Counsel who have appeared before me that my mind has fluctuated a good deal during the course of their arguments. Rightly or wrongly my mind is now stabilised. There are before me two applications. Both applications are made in a suit for partition entitled C.S. No. 762 of 1926 relating to a joint family known as the P.M.A. Firm. In that suit a preliminary decree was passed on the 22nd November, 1928. By that preliminary decree it was ordered and decreed that the suit be and thereby was referred to a Commissioner to take the following accounts:

(a) an account of the property, credit and effects of the said joint family (inclusive of the assets, profits and liabilities of the said P.M.A. Firm belonging to the said joint family) as on the institution of the suit,

(b) an account of the debts and liabilities of the said family outstanding, and

(c) an account of all moneys of the joint family which have come into the hands of both or either of the defendants 1 and 3 herein not on the ground of wilful default, but in the ordinary course of management of the said family, and to make an enquiry whether the compromise set up by the defendants 1






























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