ILLOTH VALAPPIL AMBUNHI Vs. KUNHAMBU KARANAVAN
LAWS(SC)-2019-9-121
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on September 19,2019

Illoth Valappil Ambunhi Appellant
VERSUS
Kunhambu Karanavan Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

GURNAM SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND OTHER VS. LEHNA SINGH (D) BY LRS [REFERRED TO]
CHUNILGJ V MEHTA SONS LIMITED ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA INTERVENER VS. CENTURY SPINNING MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD NOORUL HODA VS. BIBI RAIFUNNISA [REFERRED TO]
PREM SINGH VS. BIRBAL [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

M. ANJANEYULU VS. M. S. MAHABOOB [LAWS(APH)-2022-10-150] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWANDAS SENDHARAM PANCHAL VS. HEIRS OF DECEASED KANTILAL KESHAVLAL JANI [LAWS(GJH)-2022-6-136] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Indira Banerjee, J. - (1.)This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 12th March, 2009 in Second Appeal No. 229 of 1996 passed by a Single Bench of the Kerala High Court, whereby the High Court has set aside the concurrent decisions of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court and declared that the suit property belongs to the Chuzhali Bhagavathi Dharmadeva Bhandaram (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bhandaram').
(2.)The High Court further declared that the deed of assignment dated 31st July, 1971 executed by Raman Aithan Ashari in favour of the appellant in respect of the suit property was null and void and not binding on the respondents and allowed the respondents to recover possession of the suit property for and on behalf of the the Bhandaram.
(3.)The facts giving rise to this Appeal are very briefly enumerated hereinafter:
Raman Aithan Ashari, hereinafter referred to as Raman, executed a deed of gift of the said property in favour of the Bhandaram. According to the appellants, though the deed of gift stated that possession had been delivered, there was no evidence of acceptance of the gift or of the Bhandaram being in possession. No presumption of acceptance of the gift could arise on the basis of the recital of delivery of possession in the deed of gift as the donee was only an inanimate body and there was no evidence of any person accepting the gift or entering into possession on its behalf.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.