PUSHAVATHI VIJAYARAM GAJAPATHI RAJ MANNE SULTAN BAHADUR Vs. VISHWESHWAR GAJAPATHI RAJ
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
PUSHAVATHI VIJAYARAM GAJAPATHI RAJ MANNE SULTAN BAHADUR,
VISHWESHWAR GAJAPATHI RAJ
Click here to view full judgement.
Rajagopalan, J. -
(1.) The preliminary decree in this suit defining the shares for the partition of the properties among the heirs of Alak Narayan, was issued on 11-9-1950. There was no dispute either on the question who were the heirs, or on the question, what their shares were. The two sons of Alak Narayan and their mother Rani Vidya-vathi were the heirs and each was entitled to a third of the partible properties of the joint family of which they were members along with Alak Narayan. It would be convenient to refer to the two sons in the rest of this judgment as the plaintiff and defendant 1 and their mother, the second defendant in this suit, will be referred to by her name.
(2.) When the determination of the assets of the joint family available for partition was taken up, a list of 106 items of immoveable properties was filed into court, with reference to which the parties formulated their claims and objections. The figure 106 may be misleading, because sub-items were enumerated under many of the 106 items. The question of the partition of the jewels also was taken up. Most of the jewels were in the Thoshakhana within the fort of Vizianagaram, the residence of the Zamindar and his family. With reference to these jewels also the parties formulated their claims to which objections were lodged by the others. While claims to the immoveable properties had to be adjudicated only between the plaintiff, the first defendant and their mother, the Dowager Rani Lalithakumari Devi pressed for the adjudication of her claim, that some of the items in the Thoshakhana constituted her stridhanam and were therefore not available for partition between the plaintiff, defendant 1 and their mother. That was one of the claims included in the application she filed. Appln. No. 4830 of 1950. Rani Vidyavathi claimed 55 items of jewellery as her stri-dhanam, to be excluded from the scope of the partition. The plaintiff specified 140 items of jewellery and contended that these constituted the "regalia" of the zamindar, impartible by custom, and he urged that those also should be excluded from the scope of the partition.
(3.) With reference to these, claims and counter claims, 15 issues weere framed on 2-4-1953. The evidence was mostly documentary. The only oral evidence was that of the Dowager Rani Lalitha-kumari Devi, who was, examined on commission with the consent of the parties under the orders of this court.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.