V KRISHNAMACHARLU, MANAGER, KARVENGAR ESTATE, RAJA KUMARA TIRUMALA RAJ BAHADUR, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LATE RAJA Vs. THIRUMALA KUMARA RANGACHARIAR; THIRUMALA KUMARA KANAKAMMAL (DEAD)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Second Appeal No. 560 of 1904: - We are unable to agree with Mr. Seshagiri Aiyar's interpretation of the decision in Nallayappa Pillian V/s. Ambalavana Pandara Sannadhi (1903) I.L.R. 27 M. 465, and we consider that the meaning to be attached to the language used by the Court in that case is that stated in MUthusami Pillai V/s. Arunachellam Chettiar . Following that case we are of opinion that the defendant, the superior landholder, was not required to exchange, patta and muchilika with the plaintiff, an inamdar holding under him. The circumstance that the plaintiff happens to possess the kudivaram right in the property in respect of which he was also Inamdar bound to pay "russum" to the landholder does not alter the case or impose upon the land-holder, an obligation which would not otherwise subsist between him and the Inamdar.

(2.) We, therefore, set aside the decrees of the Courts below and remand the case for disposal by the Court of First Instance. Costs will abide and follow the result.

(3.) Second Appeal No. 561 of 1904 follows.