VALIA PEEDIKAKKANDI KATHEESSA UMMA Vs. PATHAKKALAN NARAYANATH KUNHAMU DECEASED AND AFTER HIM HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave by Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 raises an important question under the Muhammadan Law, which may be stated thus:

(2.) It has been held by the High Court and the Courts below that in Muhammadan Law such a gift is invalid. The facts leading up to this question may now be stated.

(3.) One Mammotty was married to Seinaba and he made a gift of his properties including immovable property to Seinaba on April 7, 1944 by a registered deed. Mammotty died on May 3, 1946 without an issue. Seinaba also died soon afterwards on February 25, 1947, without leaving an issue. At the time of the gift Seinaba was 15 years 9 months old. It appears that Mammotty was ill for a long time and was in hospital and he was discharged uncured a month before the execution of the gift deed and remained in his mother-in-law's house afterwards. There are conflicting versions about the nature of the disease and a plea was taken in the as that the gift was made in contemplation of death and was voidable. This plea need not detain us because the trail Judge and the first Appellate Judge did not accept it.