<?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>1969 (7) TMI 126 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467950</link>
    <description>A Hindu charitable endowment was treated as created by the founder during his lifetime where the will set apart property for charity, fixed the object, and the charitable purpose was implemented by construction of a chatram and poor-feeding from income. In the absence of a founder-declared line of trusteeship, a later family compromise governed devolution, creating joint trusteeship with succession by heirs or nominees. The first plaintiff was therefore entitled only to a moiety in the C schedule trusteeship, sharing it by turns with the other side. Title to the B schedule properties failed because the required reversionary links were not proved, although the adoption of Krishnaswami Reddiar was accepted and the senior wife was treated as the adoptive mother for succession tracing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:02:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (7) TMI 126 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467950</link>
      <description>A Hindu charitable endowment was treated as created by the founder during his lifetime where the will set apart property for charity, fixed the object, and the charitable purpose was implemented by construction of a chatram and poor-feeding from income. In the absence of a founder-declared line of trusteeship, a later family compromise governed devolution, creating joint trusteeship with succession by heirs or nominees. The first plaintiff was therefore entitled only to a moiety in the C schedule trusteeship, sharing it by turns with the other side. Title to the B schedule properties failed because the required reversionary links were not proved, although the adoption of Krishnaswami Reddiar was accepted and the senior wife was treated as the adoptive mother for succession tracing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>