POOMALAI AMMAL Vs. SUBBAMMAL MINOR
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Click here to view full judgement.
Chandra Reddi, J. -
(1.) This second appeal is brought from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin setting aside the decree of the trial Court giving the relief to the plaintiffs as prayed for. The material facts of the case are these:
(2.) One Sankaralinga had two sons, Ramaswami and Arunachala, and three daughters, the plaintiffs in the present suit. His two sons were demented. He was anxious that his sons should get married in spite of their being insane. Arunachala was first married to one Pulamadi and as she died Sankaralinga wanted to get Arunachala married a second time. For that purpose, he approached the parents of one Sivanananji. The latter was not willing to give Sivanananji in marriage to Arunachala unless some properties were settled upon the girl before marriage. Accordingly Sankaralinga executed a settlement deed conveying the suit properties to Sivanananji. It is this document that falls to be considered in this second appeal.
(3.) Sankaralinga died early in 1930. During his lifetime he made a gift of several items of property to his daughters, the present plaintiffs, and after his death, Ramaswami by his wife as his guardian, instituted a suit for partition of the family properties ignoring the gifts in favour of the present plaintiffs. In that suit the present suit properties were not included. Ultimately the suit ended in a compromise and under the terms of the compromise the title of the plaintiffs to the suit properties was recognised and affirmed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.