JUDGMENT

The judgment and decree dated 17.06.2004 of the Additional Munsiff-II, Neyyattinkara in O.S.No.516 of 2003 were reversed in appeal, A.S.No.99 of 2004 by the Sub Judge, Neyyattinkara as per the judgment dated 18.09.2010. The Appellate Court on setting aside the decree granted by the Munsiff in favour of the plaintiff, dismissed the suit. The plaintiff is therefore in appeal before this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. On 17.02.2011, this Court formulated the following substantial question of law, on which, this appeal was admitted,—

“When Ext.A1 gift deed provides for taking usufructs from the property gifted by the donor during his life time, whether the finding of the courts below that the donor did not part with possession is sustainable and if so, whether Ext.A1 gift deed is not valid.”

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. The facts relevant for the appreciation of the question of law are stated thus:

The appellant is the son of Sri.Mohammed Kannu. He had executed Ext.A1 settlement dated 18.10.1989 in favour of the appellant. The appellant claims that he had ac