Skip to content


Navaneethakrishna Marudappa thevar Vs. the Collector and Agent to the Court of Wards - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1935Mad1017; 160Ind.Cas.647; (1935)69MLJ632
AppellantNavaneethakrishna Marudappa thevar
RespondentThe Collector and Agent to the Court of Wards
Excerpt:
- .....amount, if it came out of the savings 6 per cent, will be allowed from the date of drawing.99. the jewels, vessels, lace cloths, samans, etc. as described in ex. ttt will be delivered to the plaintiff excluding the jewels and vessels devoted to the hirudalaya temple, (vide schedule i to ex. oo) and any other devasthanams.100. the parties will give and take proportionate costs here and in the court below.101. the trusteeship of the hirudalaya temple and the jewels bequeathed for the benefit of that temple under schedule i of the will have not been the subject of any issue in this case and we do not decide it. the parties, if so advised, may settle that dispute in another suit. meanwhile the jewels given for the benefit of that temple will remain in deposit under the directions of the.....
Judgment:
ORDER

96. The Court of Wards have now sent their reply confirming the will. The plaintiff in (O.S. No. 2 of 1922) will therefore have a decree for all the savings of the estate in the hands of the Court of Wards that is whatever form they might be existing and the jewels, silver vessels, furniture and other moveables including cash in the hands of the Rani at the time of her death, with further interest on the savings including the cash with the Rani from the date of the death of the Rani after deducting the funeral expenses which it is agreed, amount to Rs. 3,000. This will not include the funds of the Devasthanams.

97. The District Court may determine the actual figure to which the plaintiff is entitled, in execution.

98. As to the interest, the actual interest earned by the Court of Wards and afterwards during the time the bonds and money were lying in deposit under the direction of the District Court will be allowed. Some amount is drawn by the respondent and on that amount, if it came out of the savings 6 per cent, will be allowed from the date of drawing.

99. The jewels, vessels, lace cloths, samans, etc. as described in Ex. TTT will be delivered to the plaintiff excluding the jewels and vessels devoted to the Hirudalaya temple, (vide Schedule I to Ex. OO) and any other Devasthanams.

100. The parties will give and take proportionate costs here and in the Court below.

101. The trusteeship of the Hirudalaya temple and the jewels bequeathed for the benefit of that temple under Schedule I of the will have not been the subject of any issue in this case and we do not decide it. The parties, if so advised, may settle that dispute in another suit. Meanwhile the jewels given for the benefit of that temple will remain in deposit under the directions of the District Court.

102. On the portion as to which the appellant in A. Section No. 428 of 1930 has succeeded, the respondent (Subbayya Thevan) will pay the proportionate court-fee to Government. On the disallowed portion, the appellant himself will pay the court-fees. As to Appeal 429 of 1930, the appellant will pay Rs. 500 to Government.

103. In O.S. No. 2 of 1922, the order of the Court below directing the plaintiff to pay full costs to the Court of Wards will be vacated. There will be no separate order as to costs of the Court of Wards in this suit. The plaintiff in this suit will be liable along with the plaintiff in O.S. No. 1 of 1922 for the Rs. 500 decreed to the Court of Wards in all the litigation.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //