K RAJ Vs. MUTHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a judgment and order passed by the Madras High Court, dated January 30, 1992 in Second Appeal No. 291/1982. A suit filed by the Predecessor-in-Interest of the present appellants, claiming one half share in the property in question, was dismissed by the Trial Court but in first Appeal the order of the Trial Court was set aside and a preliminary decree for redemption of the property, as prayed for, was passed and the plaintiff was held to be entitled for the relief claimed. Aggrieved by that order the respondent preferred the Second Appeal in the High Court which has been allowed and the said order has been impugned in the present appeal.

(2.) The main question which has been raised in the present appeal is whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the findings of fact recorded by the first Appellate Court, by re-appraising the evidence in violation of provisions contained in S. 100 CPC. A perusal of the judgment passed by the High Court also shows that the Court had not framed any substantial question of law while entertaining and deciding the Second Appeal.

(3.) The brief facts are that one Anthony Ummini owned certain properties and created two mortages in respect thereof on June 20, 1948. the mortgage was in favour of one Ananthan. Anthony died later as a bachelor. His another brother Ponnu who pre-deceased him, was also as a bachelor. He had two sisters namely, Muthamma and Kannamma, Muthamma paid the mortgage money on 14-3-1960 and obtained a document of release of the property from Ananthan. In the year 1978, a suit was filed by Kannamma impleading Muthamma as defendant with a prayer for redemption of plaint schedule properties, basing her claim on the facts that on the death of Anthony Ummini her brother, the two sisters namely, the plaintiff and the defendant would inherit his property. At the time of his death Anthony Ummini had none of his parents living nor any other brothers or sisters except the plaintiff and the defendant.