Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.46 seconds)

Imbichi Kandan And Ors. vs Imbichi Pennu And Ors. on 21 August, 1895

In Imbichi Kandan and Ors. v. Imbichi Pennu and Ors. ILR 19 Madras 1 the Madras High Court have considered the question in which it held that on the death of a Thiyyan of South Malabar following the Makkathayam rule of inheritance, his mother, widow and daughter are entitled to succeed to his property (acquired by himself and his father) in preference to his father's divided brothers. The lower appellate court overlooking the law of succession that in the absence of proof of custom Mitakshara Law will be presumed to apply, and without correctly comprehending the judicial pronouncements held that widow is not entitled for any share. There was no attempt to establish any independent evidence by the 2nd respondent to show that widow is not entitled to a share under customary law. The interested testimony of D.W.I which runs counter to judicial precedents ought not have been relied as establishing the custom applicable to the Thiyyas of Calicut.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Kelukutty & Ors vs Mammad & Ors on 1 August, 1972

10. The Supreme Court in Kelukutty and Ors. v. Mammad and Ors. reported in 1972 KLT 725 following Imbichi Kandan and Ors. v. Imbichi Pennu and Ors. ILR 19 Madras 1 held that Thiyyas of former Calicut Taluk were governed by the customary law known as Makkathayam. As per the Makkathayam rule of inheritance an undivided brother of a deceased person succeeded to the self-acquired property of the deceased in preference to the wife and daughter of the deceased. It that is so the daughter's son who comes after them under the general Hindu Law cannot have a superior claim unless a custom to that effect is pleased and proved.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - K S Hegde - Full Document
1