BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. SUNDAR, J.
Celestine - Appellant
Versus
Ebisal & Ors. - Respondents
S.A.(MD)No.334 of 2004 and C.M.P.(MD)No.4292 of 2018
Decided On : 20-07-2018
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 96 - Section 115 - Constitution of India - Article 227 - Immovable Properties – Sale Deed - Two items of immovable properties standing in name of one M.Esthoor constitute subject matter of instant second appeal - One item of property admeasures 9 Ares or thereabouts in re-survey in village - Other item of immovable property admeasures 64.5 Ares or thereabouts comprised in Re.S.Nos.335/6, 7, 8 in village - Both these items of immovable properties are described as garden land with coconut trees - These two items of properties standing in name of one M.Esthoor shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as suit properties for sake of brevity and convenience - For sake of clarity, these two items of suit properties with four boundaries as described in records of court below are set out hereunder – Held, Admitted facts and admitted chronology in instant case straight away answers this question - It is an admitted position that suit being O.S. was filed in trial court - It is also admitted case between parties that sale deeds under which suit properties were alienated are vide sale deed marked as Ex.A.10 and sale deed marked as Ex.A.11 - To be noted, vide Exs.A.10, item No.1 of suit properties was alienated and vide Ex.A.11, item No.2 of suit properties was alienated - Therefore, admitted chronology and records placed before this court which are indisputable shows that partition suit was not filed after execution of sale deed - Therefore, substantial question of law No.2 automatically stands answered against appellant and in favour of respondents as partition suit has not been filed after execution of sale deed - In light of narrative supra and in light of both substantial questions of law on which instant second appeal was admitted being answered against appellant and in favour of respondents, instant second appeal fails and stands ordered marking documents as stated in this judgment - Considering proximity of relationship between parties, parties are left to bear their respective costs – Appeal Dismissed.
1. Two items of immovable properties standing in the name of one M.Esthoor constitute the subject matter of the instant second appeal. One item of property admeasures 9 Ares or thereabouts in re-survey No.515/14, 17 in Kadiapattanam village, Kalkulam Taluk, Manavalakurichi Sub District in Kanyakumari district. The other item of immovable property admeasures 64.5 Ares or thereabouts comprised in Re.S.Nos.335/6, 7, 8 in Noondakara-B village, Agasteeswaran Taluk, Rajakkamangalam Sub District in Kanyakumari District. Both these items of immovable properties are described as garden land with coconut trees. These two items of properties standing in the name of one M.Esthoor shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as 'suit properties' for the sake of brevity and convenience. For the sake of clarity, these two items of suit properties with four boundaries as described in the records of court below are set out hereunder :
Sl. No.
1
2
District:
Kanyakumari
Kanyakumari
Sub District:
Manavalakurichi
Rajakkamangalam
Taluk:
Kalkulam
Agasteeswaram
Village:
Kadiapattanam
Noondakara - B
Re. Sy.No.
515/14, 17
335/6,7,8
Extent:
9 Ares
64.5 Ares
Description of property.
Garden land with Coconut Trees.
Garden land with coconut trees.
Boundaries: North:
Property of Velayudha Perumal.
Property of Velayudha Perumal.
South:
Ice Plant
Ice Plant
East :
Plaintiff's and defendants' property.
Property of a Doctor
West :
Ammancoil Property
Plaintiff's and Defendants' property.
2. It is not in dispute before this Court that the above said Esthoor had 7 sons and 4 daughters in all. The genesis for this lis commenced more than a quarter century ago in 1992. In other words, the genesis for this litigation commenced more than two and half decades ago. To be precise, it commenced on 19.3.1992 when one E.Dennis, one of the seven sons of the aforesaid Esthoor filed a partition suit in O.S.No.257 of 1992 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram. As there is a second round of litigation about which there shall be discussion infra, this O.S.No.257 of 1992 on the file of District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram shall be referred to as 'senior suit' in this judgment. (To be noted, this senior suit was subsequently transferred to District Munsif Court, Eraniel and was renumbered as O.S.No.303 of 1995). In the senior suit, Dennis sought for division by metes and bounds and separate possession of 1/9th share in the suit properties.
3. The plaint was predicated on the ground that suit properties were purchased in the name of his father M.Esthoor from and out of the earnings of members of the family. Immediate and proximate cause or in other words cause of action for filing of the senior suit (as it unfurls from the plaint) was that M.Esthoor's son-in-law L.Celestine was influencing M.Esthoor to get suit properties conveyed by sale deeds in Celestine's name for a very nominal price.
4. To be noted, in this suit filed by one of the sons of M.Esthoor (E.Dennis), the other six sons and one unmarried daughter were arrayed as defendants 2 to 8, while M.Esthoor himself was arrayed as defendant No.1. Aforesaid Celestine (son-in-law of M.Esthoor) was arrayed as defendant No.9. From the plaint averments, it comes to light that three daughters of M.Esthoor were not arrayed as defendants as they had been given in marriage with Sridhana and jewels, for which the spending was made from the common family earnings and assets. This suit was decreed ex parte on 20.09.1993. Half a decade later, i.e., 5 years later, to be precise, on 28.4.1998, L.Celestine filed a suit in O.S.No.102 o
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.