1. Plaintiff has come up in second appeal. He sued for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from entering upon the plaint property or in the alternative for recovery of possession. The property was held by one Pokkan as a kuzhikanom tenant under Valia Purayil tarwad. While so, a gift deed was executed by him of his rights in the property on 28 91934 in favour of his upatavazhi consisting of the plaintiff and others. Ex-Al is the copy of that document. Later on, that document was cancelled by him by a deed of cancellation Ex-Bll. Subsequent to that, the marupat was renewed by Pokkan in favour of the jenmi-tharwad under Ex-Bl. Then on 19-3-51 he sold away his rights in the property by Ex-B10 to the first defendant who is his son-in-law and the 2nd defendant the brother of the 1st defendant. They are also the members of the tarwad. According to the plaintiff, his upathavazhi was in possession of the property, and the defendants attempted to trespass into the property. Hence the suit was filed. But according to the defendants the gift was never acted upon. They were in possession even before Ex-B10 was executed in their favour. The trial court held that the gif