Judgement

JAGANNADHADAS J. - These two are appeals against two separate decrees of the High Court of Madras arising out of two suits as between the same contesting parties with reference to a connected set of facts. Civil Appeal No. 104 of 1954 is before us by virtue of special leave granted by this Court under Art.136 (1) of the Constitution. Civil Appeal No. 169 of 1956 has come up by reason of certificate granted by the High Court under Art. 133 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

The parties to the litigation are Nattukottai Chetties a wealthy banking community in South India who, at the time, were having large banking transactions in Burma and other places in South-East Asia. One AL. PR. Periakaruppan Chettiar (hereinafter referred to as Periakaruppa) owned and possessed considerable properties. He adopted one AL. PR. Alagappa Chettiar (hereinafter referred to as Alagappa) in or about the year 1914. There arose acute differences between them from about the year 1924 owing to the alleged wasteful habits of Alagappa who ran into debts.

This led to criminal complaints between them, each against the other; in 1926. (See EXS. P-5 and D-12). One of Alagappa s creditors obtained a decree against him and attached Alagappa s half share in the family residential house including the site on which it was situated. This resulted in a regular suit in which the question at issue was whether the site was ancestral site and whether the super-structure was constructed out of the ancestral funds.

It was found that the site was ancestral. Periakaruppa maintained that the super-structure which was substantial in value compared with the site was built out of his self-acquired funds and was not joint family property, while Alagappa and the attaching creditor contended to the contrary. The litigation went up to the High Court and the High Court accepted the contention of Periakaruppa and made a declaration that the site was ancestral and that the super-structure was the self acquisition of Periakaruppa.

The judgment of the High Court was dated 19th November 1926, and is reported in Periakaruppan v. Arunnchallam I.L.R. 50 Mad. 582: (A.I.R. 1927 Mad. 676) (A). During the pendency of this litigation in the High Court the adopted son Alagappa filed a suit on 9th September 1926, on behalf of himself and his minor son by name AL. PR. AL Periakaruppan Chettiar (herein after) for distinction, referred to as junior Periakaruppa, represented by his mother and next friend by name Muthai Achi.

It has to be mentioned that in or about 27th June 1926, Periakaruppa purported to make a second adoption of a young boy by name AL. PR. Ranganathan Chettiar (hereinafter referred to as Ranganatha) on the footing that such an adoption was permitted by special custom in Nattukottai Chetti families. The suit O.S. No. 114 of 1926 filed by Alagappa and his minor son, junior Periakaruppa, was therefore filed as against Periakaruppa and his second adopted son Ranganatha, who at the time was also a minor.

It was for delivery of a half share of the properties of the family on the footing that all the properties were joint family properties and for a declaration that the second adoption was invalid. The first defendant therein, Periakaruppa, filed a written statement contesting both these matters and claiming that all the suit properties in their entirety were his self-acquisition and that the plaintiffs had absolutely no rights therein and also asserting that the second adoption was valid.

Before the suit proceeded to the stage of issue and trial, the dispute between the parties was compromised by a Rajinama brought about by four Panchayatdars, who are all respectable members of the Nattukottai Chetti community. Some of the questions that arise in the present appeals centre round the proper. construction of some of the terms of this Rajinama, which will be noticed later.

It is sufficient to state at this stage that by that Rajinama the two plaintiffs, Alagappa and his minor son, junio