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

1948 Supreme(Ori) 7

RAY, NARASIMHAM
UDAYPRATAP SINGH DEO – Appellant
Versus
KRUSHNA PADHANO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.RATH, K.PATNAIK, K.S.R.MURTHY, P.MISHRA

RAY, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a plaintiffs' appeal for recovery of Mustajari rent to the extent of Rs. 3700 and odd in respect of a lease commencing on the 1st of July 1935 and ending on the 30th June 1936. The plaintiff, when he granted the lease, was a mortgagee. The lands appertained to an estate jn the district of Ganjam known as Sanokimedi Estate. Succession to this estate has been the subject of continuous and protracted litigation and which, if I can say so, has not yet been at its end. As the question of title to grant the lease has been raised by the tenants (respondents) who resisted the validity of the plaintiff's claim, certain facts, in relation to the succession of the estate and the litigation about that, have to be mentioned. The village, in respect of which Mustajari rent has been claimed admittedly lies within the ambits of that estate. One Braja Kishore was the admitted holder of this estate. He died in 1906. He was succeeded by a collateral agnate, by name, Purusottam who died in 1915 and was succeeded by Kunja Behari, his brother. During Kunjabehari's lifetime, one Nandmani, claiming to be the legitimate son Braja Kishore and in that capacity claiming to have a pre









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