RAJAH SARVAGNA KUMARA KRISHNA YACHENDRA, RAJAH OF VENKATAGIRI Vs. RAJAH NAVANEETHA KRISHNA YACHENDRA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals arise out of the Order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal in O. P. Nos. 2297, 2301 and 2310 of 1953 allowing the claim in part to the compensation from and out of the interim payment and advance compensation deposited by the Government before the Tribunal in respect of the Venkatagiri Estate.

(2.) The following genealogy may be useful to appreciate the facts and the contentions of the parties.

(3.) Venkatagiri Estate is an ancient palayam and an impartible estate. It was also treated as an impartible estate by Madras Act 2 of 1904. Succession to the "estate was governed by the rule of primogeniture. The present Rajah is Sri Sarvagna Kumara Krishna Yachendra shown in the genealogy. With a view to acquire the rights of the land-holders in permanently settled and certain other estates in the State of Madras and to introduce ryotwari settlement in such estates, the Madras Legislature passed the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, (Act 26 of 1948) hereinafter referred to as the Act. The Venkatagiri Estate was notified under that Act. Pursuant to the provisions of that Act, the Government deposited before the Tribunal Rs. 12,11,419 as advance compensation and Rs. 1,55,119 towards interim payment. Navaneetha Krishna, the 3rd brother of the present Rajah, filed O. P. No. 294 of 1950 claiming a share in that compensation or in the alternative, for distribution between him and the other claimants ? ...?th of the compensation deposited before the Tribunal and also for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000 per mensem from 1st August, 1949, till the compensation was finally determined and paid from and out of interim payment made by the Government. The Rajah filed a counter denying that the petitioner was entitled to the compensation as a sharer. He alleged that the petitioner was in possession of valuable properties and that, having regard to the devaluation of the estate under the provisions of the Act, the petitioner would be entitled to maintenance in accordance with the value of his interest depending upon the proportion which the basic annual sum bore to the actual net income which the Rajah was hitherto deriving from his estate.