P.K.IYER BALASUBRAMANYAN
A. M. Abdul Karim – Appellant
Versus
A. M. Mamoo – Respondent
P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.
1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was one for partition on the averment that the plaint schedule property belonged to the thavazhi consisting of the plaintiff and his mother. The parties are Muslims of North Malabar governed by Marumakkathayam law. One Achamma had four children, Mammu, Moosa, Beechumma and Mariyumma. The plaintiff is the son of Mariyumma. Defendants 2 to 4 are the children of Beechumma. Defendants 5 to 9 are the children of Moosa who is no more. Mammu is the first defendant. The plaint schedule properties were gifted under Ext. A1 dt. 9-9-1940 in favour of Achamma and her four children by the 'wife and children of the brother of the husband of Achumma. There was an earlier suit for partition O. S.26 of 1975 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court of Tellicherry filed by Mammu impleading his sisters Beechumma and Mariyumma and the legal representatives of Moosa. It must be noted that the plaintiff herein, the son of Mariyumma was not a party to that suit. That suit proceeded on the basis that the properties obtained by Achumma and her children under Ext. A1 were taken by the donees as coownership properties and that Ach
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.