Govinda Menon, J.-Krishnaswami Nayudu, J., expressing the opinion that there is a conflict between the decisions in Kunhappa Nambiar v. Shridevi Kettilamma1 , and Kunhi Kannan v. Soopi2, on the one hand and the Full Bench decision in Venkatanarayana v. Venkata Somaraju3, on the other has referred this second appeal to a bench and that is how it comes before us.

The appellant was the petitioner in an application under Order 34, rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code for a personal decree in O.S. No. 505 of 1936 on the file of the District Munsif, Tellicherry. That application was allowed by the trial Court but in appeal the learned District Judge set aside the personal decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the application R.M.P. No. 47 of 1942.

The facts are shortly these: The appellant was a tenant under the tarwad of the respondent and because the land revenue on the leased property had not been paid by the jenmi he was compelled to pay the same and thereafter O.S. No. 505 of 1936 was brought as a mortgage suit for the recovery of the amount paid by him by sale of the rights of the jenmi. To that suit the karnavan of the tarwad representing the family as such, was the only defe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document