<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1959 (1) TMI 32 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275857</link>
    <description>The court upheld the validity of the adoption of Parthasarathi Rao by Papayamma. It recognized the adopted son&#039;s right to claim his adoptive father&#039;s share from other coparceners but questioned this right when the sole surviving coparcener had disposed of the property before the adoption. The court limited the adopted son&#039;s rights to displacing titles acquired by inheritance only. It dismissed the challenge to the adoption of Srinivasa Sarma and upheld the gift to him, finding that the donor&#039;s intention was to confer her properties on him as a named individual regardless of the adoption&#039;s validity. The court affirmed the lower courts&#039; decisions and dismissed the appeals with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2018 12:16:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (1) TMI 32 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275857</link>
      <description>The court upheld the validity of the adoption of Parthasarathi Rao by Papayamma. It recognized the adopted son&#039;s right to claim his adoptive father&#039;s share from other coparceners but questioned this right when the sole surviving coparcener had disposed of the property before the adoption. The court limited the adopted son&#039;s rights to displacing titles acquired by inheritance only. It dismissed the challenge to the adoption of Srinivasa Sarma and upheld the gift to him, finding that the donor&#039;s intention was to confer her properties on him as a named individual regardless of the adoption&#039;s validity. The court affirmed the lower courts&#039; decisions and dismissed the appeals with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>