High Courts(1892) 05 MAD CK 0005

Kondapati Ayyappa vs Sree Raja Dantaluri Venkatakrishnamarazu, Zamindar Garu, being minor by his mother guardian Sree Raja Dantaluri Rangayya Garu

Madras High Court · Decided on 4 May 1892 · Citation: (1892) 2 MLJ 219

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 137 words
1.

We think that the Acting District Judge was right in holding that the plaintiff as the registered Zamindar had a right under Act VIII of 1865 to

compel defendant to accept a patta. The decision in c v. Virappa, I. L. R 5 M 145 is an authority for the proposition that in a Zamindari the only

Zamindar is the registered Zamindar and we do not think that (Sic) this point the authority of that decision has been shaken by one case in Subbu

v. Vasanthappan I. L. R 8 M 351. In a Zamindari the only landholder entitled to proceed under Act VIII of 1865 against the tenants of the

Zamindari must be the Zamindar and the only Zamindar for the time being is the registered Zamindar.

2.

We dismiss this second appeal with costs.