ORDER.-The defendant is the appellant. The suit is to set aside the sale deed and for recovery of possession of the suit property with profits. Shortly the facts are that one Kandayya Servai for himself and as guardian of his minor daughter Kaliammal alias Chitravalli executed a sale deed on 21st October, 1959 marked as Exhibit B-2 in favour of one Jainullabdeen Rowther for Rs. 700. On 25th April, 1966 under Exhibit B-1 Jainullabdeen Rowther sold the suit property to the defendant. On 26th May, 1966 under Exhibit A-1 which is admittedly subsequent to Exhibit B-l the plaintiff took the sale deed from Kaliammal alias Chitravalli. After getting the sale deed the plaintiff filed the present suit on 14th June, 1963 to set aside the sale deed Exhibit B-2 and for other consequential reliefs. The plaintiff also contended that Exhibit B-2 is not binding on the minor and that it was not for the benefit of the minor. The main defence seems to be that the sale under Exhibit B-8 in favour of Veerammal the mother of the vendor under Exhibit A-l was benami for Kandayya Servai and as such Exhibit B-2 is valid. In any event it was stated that the sale will be binding on the minor since it was for t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document