R YISWANATHAN RUKN UL MULK SYED ABDUL WAJID R GAJAMBAL AMMAL RUKN UL MULK SYED ABDUL WAJID RUKN UL MULK SYED ABDUL WAJID Vs. RUKN UL MULK SYED ABDUL WAJID:R YISWANATHAN:RUKN UL MULK SYED ABDUL WAJID:R GAJAMBAL AMMAL:V GAJAMBAL AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT of S. K. Das and Shah JJ. was delivereaby

(2.) RAMALINGAM Mudaliar-a resident of Bangalore (in the former Indian State of Mysore)-started life as a building contractor. He prospered in the business and acquired an extensive estate which included many houses in the Civil and Military station at Bangalore, in Bangalore city and also in the towns of Madras, Hyderabad and. Bellary. He dealt in timber, established cinematograph theatres, obtained a motor-car selling Agency and made investments in plantations and coffee estates. He set up a factory for manufacturing tiles, and later floated a sugar company. The Indian Sugars and Refineries Ltd., of which he became the Managing Agent and purchased a large block of shares. For some years before his death RAMALINGAM had taken to excessive drinking, and was subject to frequent coronary attacks. He became peevish and easily excitable and his relations with his wife and children were strained. RAMALINGAM felt great disappointment in his eldest son Vishwanatha who borrowed loans from money-lenders at exorbitant rates of interest, attempted to evade payment of customs duty, failsified accounts and otherwise exhibited utter lack of business of capacity.'' RAMALINGAM had developed a violent antipathy towards a sadhu named Ramaling swami, but his wife Gajambal and his children persisted in attending upon the sadhu and visited him frequently. This led to frequent quarrels between RAMALINGAM and his wife and children. RAMALINGAM stopped the allowance for household expenses, and cancelled the power which he had given to his son Vishwanath to operate on the joint Bank account. Shortly thereafter, he left the family house. On 2/06/1942, his wife Gajambal presented a petition before the District Judge, Civil Station Banglore, for an order against Eamalingam for inquisition under the Indian Lunacy Act. On that application evidence was directed to be recorded and the District Judge called for a medical report as to Abe mental condition of RAMALINGAM.

(3.) AFTER the retrocession of the Military Station Bangalore in 1947 to the Mysore State, Suit No. 56 of 1942/43 was renumbered 61A. of 1947 and was consolidated for a trial with Suit No. 60 of 1944. Hearing of Suit No. 214 of 1944 on the Original side of the Madras High court was ordered to be stayed pending the hearing and disposal of the Mysore suits. In the three suits the plaintiffs claimed possession of the property devised under the will of Ramalingam dated 10/09/1942, on the plea that the property belonged to the jointfamily of the plaintiffs and the testator, and the executors acquired under the will no title thereto because the will was inoperative. The suits were resisted by the executors principally on the ground that Ramalingam. was competent to dispose of the estate by his will, for it was his self-acquisition. In the suit in the District court at Bangalore they also contended that the court had no jurisdiction to grant relief in respect of any property moveable or immovable outside the Mysore State. This plea was raised because in the plaint as originally filed the plaintiffs had claimed' a decree for possession of the immovable property in the Province of Madras and also on order for retransfer of the shares which were originally held by Ramalingam in the India Sugars and Refineries Ltd., and which were since the death of Ramalingam transferred to the names of the executors. By an amendment of the schedule to the plaint, claim for possession of immovables situate within the jurisdiction of the Madras High court but not the relief relating to the shares was deleted. The plea that the claim for possession of moveables outside the State of Mysore was not maintainable was apparently not persisted in before the District court. The District Judge, Bangalore, held that the property devised by the will dated 10/09/1942, was of the jointfamily of Ramalingam and his sons and the will was on that account inoperative. He accordingly decreed the suit for possession of the properties set out in the schedules and within his jurisdiction, and directed that a preliminary decree be drawn up for account of the management of the properties since the death of Ramalingam by the executors.