Skip to content


(Mulukutla) Annapuramma Vs. (Mulukutla) Atchutharamayya Garu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1927Mad1101
Appellant(Mulukutla) Annapuramma
Respondent(Mulukutla) Atchutharamayya Garu
Cases ReferredKeshavlal Punjalall v. The Collector of Ahmedabad A. I. R.
Excerpt:
.....at the entry level. there cannot be a dispute about the proposition that an employer has the right to prescribe any qualifications for appointment to a post. if that be so, an employer has a concomitant right even to prescribe disqualifications when it comes appointment to a post. persons who were never involved in criminal cases, need not be treated as equals to or on par with persons who were involved in criminal cases merely because they are acquitted later, especially in the matter of selection to the police service of the state. the classification made between them, is not only reason able but also has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved. the employer does have the right to choose a person untainted with any allegations. the attempt made to assail the impugned rules.....1. the learned district judge has overlooked that kashinath prashram v. gourava bai [1915] 39 bom. 248 has been overruled by keshavlal punjalall v. the collector of ahmedabad a. i. r. 1924 bom 228 we think, we must follow the principle laid down in the matter of desu manavala chetty [1910] 33 mad. 93 and hold that petitioner is only bound to pay stamp duty for probate on the amount of the right, title and interest of the testator in the property bequeathed and so far as ancestral property is concerned that would be 1/4 of the ancestral estate. if, of course, there is other separate non-ancestral property, separate fee will have to be paid on that. there will be no order as to costs. the papers are returned to the lower court for disposal.
Judgment:

1. The learned District Judge has overlooked that Kashinath Prashram v. Gourava Bai [1915] 39 Bom. 248 has been overruled by Keshavlal Punjalall v. The Collector of Ahmedabad A. I. R. 1924 Bom 228 We think, we must follow the principle laid down in the matter of Desu Manavala Chetty [1910] 33 Mad. 93 and hold that petitioner is only bound to pay stamp duty for probate on the amount of the right, title and interest of the testator in the property bequeathed and so far as ancestral property is concerned that would be 1/4 of the ancestral estate. If, of course, there is other separate non-ancestral property, separate fee will have to be paid on that. There will be no order as to costs. The papers are returned to the lower Court for disposal.


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