P.K.IYER BALASUBRAMANYAN, K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR
Kohnan Gopalan – Appellant
Versus
Padmini – Respondent
1. Defendant No. 23 and the legal representatives of defendant No. 24 in a suit for partition are the appellants. According to the plaintiffs, plaint B schedule item No. 1 belonged to the thavazhy of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 24 and was hence available for partition among the members of the thavazhy. We are only concerned with that item in this Second Appeal. According to defendants 23 and 24, though originally the said item belonged on tenancy to the thavazhy, the landlord had obtained a decree for arrears of rent in O. S.575 of 1948 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Tellicherry, in execution of which he was trying to sell the right, title and interest of the thavazhy over that item of property. At that stage, 'to save the property, the karanavan by himself granted a registered lease of the said item to one of his sisters, Chappila, the mother of defendants 23 and 24. That document of lease was marked as Ext. B-19 dated 29th January 1951. According to defendants 23 and 24, Chappila was in possession of the property pursuant to that lease and on her death, the right under the lease had devolved on defendants 23 and 24. Defendants 23 and 24, members of the thavazhy
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.