JUDGMENT

P.Krishna Kumar, J.

The plaintiff in a suit for declaration and recovery of possession of an immovable property is in appeal against the decree passed by the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram rejecting the plaint claim.

2. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as they were arrayed in the suit. When the plaintiff was four years old, her maternal grandfather, Reghunatha Panicker, executed a settlement deed on 06.01.1990 (Ext. A1), reserving a life interest for the executant and his wife, the third defendant. Later, he executed a cancellation deed (Ext. A6) on 03.01.1996 purportedly revoking the transfer. Subsequently, he executed sale deeds (Exts. A7 and A8) in 1996 in favour of his sons, defendant Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, in respect of the said property. Regunatha Panicker died on 28.02.2009.

3. The plaintiff attained majority on 14.06.2004. Alleging that she came to know of the execution of the said sale deeds in August 2006, the plaintiff filed the suit seeking declaration of her title over the plaint schedule property and recovery of its possession from defendant Nos. 1 and 2, contending that the cancellation deed and the subsequent sale deeds would not bind her, being