Bellie, J. (on 17-6-1991):

The question that arises for consideration in this matter is whether the sale by the plaintiff’s mother of his property during his minority is valid. The suit filed by the plaintiff for setting aside the sale was dismissed. Hence this appeal by him.

2. The plaintiffs father was one Rajamanickam Padyachi. He died in 1960. The plaintiff as a minor son and his mother-first defendant survived him. The plaint ‘B’ Schedule properties belonged to the joint family consisting of the said Rajamanickam and the plaintiff. On the death of Rajamanickam the plaintiff became entitled to 3/4th share and the first defendant to l/4th share. The second defendant who was residing in a portion of the property, taking advantage of the young age of the first defendant, got a false and fictitious sale deed dated 8. 1961 from her as representing herself and as guardian for her minor son the plaintiff as if it is supported by consideration of Rs.1,300. There was no legal necessity or justifiable reason for the sale. On these grounds the plaintiff filed the suit for setting aside the sale deed dated 8. 1961 and for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff’s 3/