High CourtsSingle Bench(1910) 12 MAD CK 0003

Arunachala Sastry vs Krishna Sastry and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 21 December 1910 · Citation: 9 Ind. Cas. 272

HON’BLE JUDGES
Wallis, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 124 words

Wallis, J.—According to the recent decision in Indety Nagadu v. Potu Kinchi Venkatasubbiah 1 M.W.N. 639 : 8 M.L.T. 376 : 8 Ind. Cas.

365, it is for the, defendant who raises a defence of this kind to show that the land in question forms part of an estate as defined in the Madras

Estates Land Act I of 1908. The definition in Section 3 Clause 2(d) is expressly limited to villages in which the land revenue alone has been granted

in inam a person not owning the Kudivaram right. There is no evidence, and no presumption, that such is the case here. The decree must be set

aside, and a decree passed in favour of the plaintiffs for Rs. 6 with costs throughout.