MADHAVAN EZHUTHASAN Vs. VELLAYAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the plaintiff in a suit for partition of fifteen cents of property with a building therein which according to the plaintiff was owned by Chami the father of the defendant in the case. Chami died after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, leaving his widow, the defendant his ion and three daughters. The widow and the three daughters sold their rights. In the property in favour of the plaintiff appellant as per Ext. A1 dated 18th May, 1971. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition claiming that he was entitled to 4/5 share in the plaint schedule item by virtue of the assignment is his favour.

(2.) The defendant disputed the maintainability of the suit and contended that the assignment would not bind him, that the property belonged to the joint family of himself and his father and that he was entitled to a 6/10 share therein.

(3.) The Munsiff, Palghat, who disposed of the case, held that the property was joint family property of Chami and the defendant that Ext. A1 assignment was not binding on the defendant and that in view of S.23 of the Hindu Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the plaintiff was not entitled to have a division of the property. The court, however, overruled the contention of the defendant that the assignment is hit by S.22 of the Act. The suit was accordingly dismissed.