Plea of defendant that transaction as sham and nominal.

K.A. Thanikkachalam, J.

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree rendered in O.S. No. 80 of 1981 dated 12-2-1983. As against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 80 of 1981, A.S. No. 15 of 1984 was filed before the District Court Pudukottai which was later on transferred to this Court and numbered as A.S. No. 986 of 1986. The plaintiff is the appellant "herein O.S. No. 80 of 1981 was filed for declaration of plaintiffs title to the suit properties and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit properties and for costs. The case of the plaintiff is as under : The suit properties are situate in Andaikulam and Santhiniapatti village. A-Schedule property is the house and its apartments and D-schedule properties are both wet and dry lands. The suit properties originally belonged to one Jain Bivi Ammal and her two sons viz., Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther and S. Sheik Mohamad alias S. Shah Mohamed, who is the first defendant in the suit. The plaintiff is the wife of Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther. Mother and two sons sold the suit properties besides other items of properties by means of a sale deed dated 21-10-1941 marked as Exhibit A-1 (B-4) for a consideration of Rs. 1,000 to Syed Mohamad Rowther. Syed Mohamed Rowther leased out the suit Arschedule properties in favour of the Jain Bivi Ammal and her two sons by a registered rent deed dated 24-10-1941. B-schedule properties besides other properties were also leased out by Syed Mohamed Rowther by another registered rent deed dated 24-10-1941 in favour of Jain Bivi Ammal and her two sons. They were enjoying the suit properties and thereafter they surrendered the same to Syed Mohamad Rowther. After the death of Syed Mohamed Rowther, his only son and heir, Mohamed Ibrahim succeeded to his father's properties and sold the same to P.K. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther for a valid consideration by means of a sale deed dated 5-4-1955. The said P.K. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther took possession of the suit properties and he was in possession and enjoyment of the same. The plaintiff is the daughter of the said P.K. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther. She married S.S. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther one of the vendors of the sale deed dated 21-10-1941 about 35 years ago.

2. P.K. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther is having 5 daughters, Since the plaintiff has been married in a poor family, her father wanted to provide her with some properties. Hence he delivered possession of the suit properties to the plaintiff promising her to execute a gift deed in her favour in respect of the suit properties. Unfortunately, thereafter be became incapacitated by paralytic attack and was bedridden and therefore he was unable to execute a gift deed in respect of the suit properties. Ultimately, plaintiff's father died and the plaintiff continued to be in possession of the suit properties even after the death of her father. Thereafter, her brothers who are the sons of P.K. Kadhar Ibrahim Rowther executed a settlement deed dated 21-4-1980 in respect of the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff conveying the suit propertied to fulfil the desires of their father. Patta for the suit property stands in the name of the plaintiff and she is paying kists for the B-schedule properties. She is also paying house tax for the A-schedule property.

3. The plaintiff's husband, family did not own any properties worth mentioning the 1st defendant is the brother of the plaintiff's husband. The first defendant went to Ceylon to the out his livelihood and thereafter he came to India and joined the military service. He came to plaintiff's house in the middle of 1980 and stayed there. According to the plaintiff her husband's brother would have taken some of the documents from her house. After this, the 1st defendant claimed share in the suit properties and the plaintiff denied his claim. So, the first defendant with the help of other defendants attempted to take possession of the suit properties.