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

1930 Supreme(Mad) 248

REILLY
(Chinta) Chandramma And Anr. – Appellant
Versus
Gunna Seethan Naidu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Reilly, J.

1. Defendants 3 and 5 in this case were co-parceners in a joint family, defendant 3 being the elder. In 1908 defendant 3 executed a simple mortgage in favour of one Joganna for Rs. 100, the date for payment being the 6th June, 1909. In 1909 defendant 5 sued defendant 3 for partition and got a decree for a half share of their property, including a half share of the property mortgaged to Joganna. He also got a decree against defendant 3 for costs. His decree1 for costs he assigned to defendant 2, who in execution of it bought defendant 3s half share of the mortgaged property, in 1912. Afterwards defendant 5 sold the half-share which he had got by his partition decree to defendant 1. In 1914 Joganna sued for sale on his mortgage, making defendant 3 and no one else a party to that suit. He got a decree for sale, and in execution of that decree the plaintiff in the present suit eventually bought the mortgaged property in Court auction in 1924. The plaintiff in 1926 brought his present suit to recover possession; but in 1927 he put in an application to amend his plaint in order to get a decree that defendants 1 and 2 should be given an opportunity to redeem or to delive






































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