P.T.RAMAN NAYAR, P.GOVINDA NAIR, K.K.MATHEW
P. GOPALAN THANTHRI – Appellant
Versus
ITTIRA KELAN – Respondent
1. In Mathew v. Ayyappankutty 1962 KLT. 61 a full bench of this Court held that the sale of tarwad property by the karanavan of the tarwad to a mortgagee in possession alters the character of the latter's possession so as to include within its scope the interest of the mortgagor tarwad with the result that, notwithstanding that the sale was an invalid sale not binding on the tarwad, a suit for redemption would be barred after twelve years of such altered possession. That is precisely the case here. It was in 1926 that the karanavan of the tarwad to which the property in suit belonged sold the property to the 1st defendant mortgagee who was in possession. The sale was invalid for want of the written consent of all the other adult members of the tarwad as required by S.21 of the Travancore-Ezhava Act by which the tarwad was governed and which had come into force a few months before the sale only the senior anandaravan had given his written consent by subscribing to the sale deed and there were admittedly two other adult members of the tarwad at the time. It was only in 1951, twenty five years later, that the plaintiff brought his suit for redemption on the strength of a p
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.