SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 2061

G.T.NANAVATI, K.RAMASWAMY
Babyammal – Appellant
Versus
Rajan Asari – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, made on March 17, 1995 in Second Appeal No. 358/94.

3. The appellant is admittedly the owner of the property bearing Survey No. 1960/6 in Chettivilakam Village of Trivandrum District. The appellant had filed a suit for possession and declaration that the respondent is a licensee. The trial court decreed the suit on November 3, 1981 and the appeal was dismissed on July 22, 1993. In the second appeal, the High Court has reversed the finding holding that the appellant had executed the gift deed on October 11, 1966 under Ex.A-1 and, therefore, the respondent had become the donee and remained in possession as owner of the property, Accordingly, the suit cannot be decreed. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

The recitals in the deed do indicate thus:

"All the right to enjoy the property and the right to reside in the building will remain with me during my life time and Rajan Asari will derive the said rights with full freedom after my life time."

4. A reading of the above would indicate that the appellant had retained the titl



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top