T.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY IYER
GOURI AMMA – Appellant
Versus
GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER – Respondent
1. This second appeal was heard by me on 1121965 and it was posted for delivery of judgment on 612 1965. On going through the records I found that defendants 3 to 6 who were also benefitted by the decree of the lower appellate court dismissing the suit were not made parties to the second appeal and therefore I felt that the appeal was not properly constituted. I mentioned this to the advocates on both sides who requested for a further hearing on this matter. The second appeal was therefore posted again in Chambers on 7121965 when the advocates on both sides were heard.
2. I am of the view that the second appeal has to fail on account of the non-impleading of defendants 3 to 6 as respondents to the appeal.
3. The plaintiff and the first defendant are the daughters of Pappi Amma who died in November 1954. Defendants 2 to 6 are the children of the first defendant. The parties are Nairs governed by the provisions of the Travancore Nair Act. The plaint items were purchased under the sale deed Ext. P-1 dated 1011 1121. Ext. P-1 is in favour of Pappi Amma and defendants 1 to 6. The consideration for Ext. P-1 is Rs. 2000/-. Ext. P-1 contains a recital that Rs. 1000/- was paid by
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.