Venkatarazu Vs. Narayanamurty

Venkatarazu vs Narayanamurty

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 28, 1889

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/773975

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/773975
Court: Chennai
Decided On: Feb 28, 1889
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - 1. It has been found that up to the death of Bhadriah in 1844 there were two Kurnams, and the land in suit had been enjoyed by Bhadriah and bis predecessors.

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Venkatarazu

Respondent

Narayanamurty

Legal References

Reported In: (1897)7MLJ54

Excerpt

- - 1. it has been found that up to the death of bhadriah in 1844 there were two kurnams, and the land in suit had been enjoyed by bhadriah and bis predecessors.1. it has been found that up to the death of bhadriah in 1844 there were two kurnams, and the land in suit had been enjoyed by bhadriah and bis predecessors. the lands set apart for the emoluments of the office of kurnams were divided between the working kurnams long ago. the office of kurnam in nagarazu's branch became extinct with bhadriah, who died in 1844, and from that time the property has always been treated as the private property of that branch, and until quiet recently the proprietor made no attempt to re-attach the land to the office of kurnam. we have no doubt that the possession of the land became adverse both to the proprietor and to the co-kurnam on the death of bhadriah in 1844. we dismiss the second appeal with costs.

Full Judgment

1. It has been found that up to the death of Bhadriah in 1844 there were two Kurnams, and the land in suit had been enjoyed by Bhadriah and bis predecessors. The lands set apart for the emoluments of the office of Kurnams were divided between the working Kurnams long ago. The office of Kurnam in Nagarazu's branch became extinct with Bhadriah, who died in 1844, and from that time the property has always been treated as the private property of that branch, and until quiet recently the proprietor made no attempt to re-attach the land to the office of Kurnam. We have no doubt that the possession of the land became adverse both to the proprietor and to the co-Kurnam on the death of Bhadriah in 1844. We dismiss the second appeal with costs.

Same Parties Venkatarazu vs Narayanamurty Same Subject Civil

Civil