Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.-This is an appeal by one Marudamuthu alias Veerappa Kandar, the plaintiff in O.S. No. 108 of 1948, on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Salem, against the judgment and decree dismissing his suit with costs. That suit was filed by the plaintiff to set aside the decree in O.S. No. 95 of 1929, on the file of the lower Court, and to set aside the decree and execution sales in O.S. No. 10 of 1930, on the file of the lower Court, and to put him in possession of the plaint properties free from all encumbrances and to decree the past and future mesne profits at Rs. 4,000 per year and costs.

The plaintiff’s allegations were briefly these: One Palaniappa Kandar was the paternal grandfather of the plaintiff and had properties worth nearly a lakh of rupees. His wife’s brother was one Nataraja Kandar, a scheming and cunning man with an eye on Palaniappa’s properties. Kandaswami, the father of the plaintiff, was a man with an unsteady and undeveloped mind and was given to many vices and weaknesses. Nataraja Kandar gave a daughter in marriage to Kandaswami as his first wife. As that lady bore him no son, Kandaswami married one Sreerangayee, the mother of the plaintiff, as his second wife. On the eve of the plaintiff’s birth on 10th January, 1928, Nataraja Kandar gave another daughter in marriage to Kandaswami as his third wife. But the plaintiff was the only son of Kandaswami, the other two wives having no sons. Palaniappa was well aware of the vices and weaknesses of Kandaswami and had taken from him a release, deed, Exhibit A-2, dated 24th January, 1925, under which he relinquished his interest in the joint family properties in favour of his father on condition of being paid Rs. 500 per year for his maintenance and agreed that on Palaniappa’s death, not he but his heirs would take with absolute rights the entire properties left by Palaniappa.

Palaniappa died on 24th September, 1927, i.e., 14 months before the birth of the plaintiff. On his death, the plaintiff’s father, Kandaswami, took over and managed all his properties and drew out Rs. 4,500, due to Palaniappa in O.S. No. 37 of 1928 on the file of the lower Court and Rs. 11,000, due to Palaniappa in O.S. No. 421 of 1927 on the file of the District Munsiff’s Court, Namakkal. He could have discharged all the liabilities of the family from the above two amounts drawn out by him and from the income of the properties, but he failed to do so and applied them for his own extravagant expenses on his vices and weaknesses. He also executed two bogus sale-deeds in favour of Nataraja Kandar, his father-in-law in respect of all the joint family properties, for Rs. 40,000 and Rs. 5,000, on 27th October, 1928 and 7th January, 1929, respectively. No consideration was paid therefor, and no title was intended to pass.

One Karuppanna Kandar, the plaintiff’s father’s sister’s husband, filed O.S. No. 95 of 1929, on the file of the lower Court, against his father and others, after the execution of above two bogus sale-deeds, for partition of the minor plaintiff’s half share and delivery of it over to him, alleging that the partition was beneficial to the minor. Defendant 1 in that suit was Kandaswami Kandar, the father of the plaintiff, Nataraja Kandar was the second defendant ; the other 21 defendants were alienees, etc. Enraged at the filing of this suit by Karuppanna on behalf of the minor plaintiff, the son of the second wife, who, it must be remembered, was not a daughter of Nataraja unlike the first and third wives, Nataraja murdered Karuppanna, and was convicted of the murder and sentenced to death and duly hanged in 1932. He went out of the record as second defendant owing to such execution. The suit was conducted for the minor by Mr. K. Srinivasaraghavan said to be an able lawyer of the Salem Bar, who became Government Pleader of Salem later on. After the murder of Karuppanna, one Chinnaswami Kandar, the husband of another paternal aunt of the plaintiff, was brought on record as