MOHAMED HANEEFA Vs. THAJUDEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are appeals by the 1st defendant from the preliminary and final decrees of the temporary Munsiff of Nedumangad in O.S. No. 146 of 1118. A.S. No. 173 of 1124 is the appeal from the preliminary decree and A.S. No. 106 of 1124 is the appeal from the final decree.

(2.) One Meeran Pillai Mohammed Ibrahim Pillai died on 20.9.1114 leaving a widow the 2nd defendant, a major daughter the 3rd defendant and four minor children who are the plaintiff's in this case. Meeran Pillai Mohammed Ibrahim Pillai had executed a hypothecation bond in favour of the Sirkar towards an agricultural loan of Rs. 600. After the death of Meeran Pillai, the Sirkar took out proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act for the recovery of the balance amount due under the hypothecation. Reciting payment of the amount due to the Sirkar, a sale deed in respect of the plaint schedule properties, was executed on 7.10.1115 by the mother 2nd defendant in her own right and as guardian of the plaintiffs who were all at the time minors, in conjunction with her major daughter the 3rd defendant, in favour of 1st defendant for Rs. 425. The plaintiffs in this suit seek to set aside the sale deed to the extent of their 35/48th share over the properties and to recover the same with past and future mesne profits from the 1st defendant.

(3.) First defendant contended that the sale is valid and not liable to be set aside. The Trial Court gave a preliminary decree to the plaintiffs setting aside the sale deed Ext. C to the extent of the plaintiffs share and directing recovery of possession of their share on a division of the properties by metes and bounds on payment to the 1st defendant, the amount he paid to the Sirkar towards discharge of the hypothecation bond in their favour. In pursuance of this preliminary decree a final decree was also passed.