Skip to content


Vungarala Seshayya and anr., Vs. Tadapalli Subba Rao and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in25Ind.Cas.61
AppellantVungarala Seshayya and anr., ;vungarala Sattirazu, ;ganni Veerayya and Chintapalli Sattirazu and anr
RespondentTadapalli Subba Rao and ors.;alla Narayanasawmy and ors.
Excerpt:
madras estates land act (i of 1908), section 3(2), clause (d) - resumed jagir, whether estate. - 1. the jagir having been resumed by the government, the property in question was neither a settled nor an unsettled jagir when the estates land act came into force and hence the definition of an estate in that act did not apply to it.2. the subordinate judge rightly relied on the defendants' (appellants') own admissions in the muchilikas executed by them for his finding that they had no occupancy rights in their respective holdings and that finding of fact cannot be questioned in second appeal.3. this and the connected second appeal are, therefore, dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

1. The jagir having been resumed by the Government, the property in question was neither a settled nor an unsettled jagir when the Estates Land Act came into force and hence the definition of an estate in that Act did not apply to it.

2. The Subordinate Judge rightly relied on the defendants' (appellants') own admissions in the muchilikas executed by them for his finding that they had no occupancy rights in their respective holdings and that finding of fact cannot be questioned in second appeal.

3. This and the connected second appeal are, therefore, dismissed with costs.


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