RAJAH VELUGOTI KUMARA KRISHNA YACHENDRA VARU & ORS. versus RAJAH VELUGOTI SARVAGNA KUMARA KRISHNA YACHENDRA VARU & ORS.

RAJAH VELUGOTI KUMARA KRISHNA YACHENDRA VARU & ORS. versus RAJAH VELUGOTI SARVAGNA KUMARA KRISHNA YACHENDRA VARU & ORS.

Venkatagiri Estate was impartible by ancient custom, not merely by agreement or statute. Impartibility persists for properties not vested in State by Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. Plaintiffs 1-4 are entitled to maintenance under 1889 agreement, chargeable on certain properties, but not to partition or a share in certain movable properties (golden howdah). Plaintiffs 5-7, illegitimate sons, have no claim under agreement or Hindu law; doctrine of res judicata applies.

Parties
Appellants: Sri Rajah Velugoti Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu and others; Respondents: Rajah Velugoti Sarvagna Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 October 1969
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Madras High Court Judgment Dated August 13, 1965 in O.s.a. Nos. 40 and 53 of 1961
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Division Bench judgment set aside; maintenance awarded to plaintiffs 1-4, suit dismissed as to plaintiffs 5-7.
Legal Topics
Impartible Estates, Partition, Maintenance, Custom, Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari
Property Law Hindu Law Impartible Estates Partition Maintenance Custom Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sri Rajah Velugoti Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu and others

Appellants

Rajah Velugoti Sarvagna Kumara Krishna Yachendra Varu and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Madras High Court Judgment Dated August 13, 1965 in O.s.a. Nos. 40 and 53 of 1961

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Venkatagiri Estate was impartible by custom or made impartible by agreement or statute
  2. 2 Whether impartibility continues after vesting of estate under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948
  3. 3 Entitlement of junior members to partition or maintenance after abolition of estate

Ratio Decidendi

Venkatagiri Estate was impartible by ancient custom, not merely by agreement or statute. Impartibility persists for properties not vested in State by Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. Plaintiffs 1-4 are entitled to maintenance under 1889 agreement, chargeable on certain properties, but not to partition or a share in certain movable properties (golden howdah). Plaintiffs 5-7, illegitimate sons, have no claim under agreement or Hindu law; doctrine of res judicata applies.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Division Bench judgment set aside; maintenance awarded to plaintiffs 1-4, suit dismissed as to plaintiffs 5-7.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs 1-4 entitled under Agreement of 1889 to Rs. 1,000/- p.m. out of income of Venkatagiri Zamindari.
  • Interest at 5.5% per annum to be calculated on compensation paid; if short of Rs. 1,000/-p.m., plaintiffs 1-4 may recover additional sums to meet Rs. 1,000/-p.m.