ANNAKUTTY Vs. XAVIER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants 3,4,6,7 and 8 are the appellants. Suit was for partition.

(2.) REMOLD acquired 9 cents of property in Fort Cochin and constructed building No. XI/594. He had five children - 3 sons and 2 daughters; Bastian, Joseph, Agnes, Cicily and George. Except Joseph and Agnes all others are dead. Joseph and Agnes are respectively defendants land 2. Plaintiffs are the children of Cicily. Defendants 4 and 5 are the children of bastian. Third defendant is his widow, but after his death she married his brother, George. Defendants 6 to 9 were born in that wedlock. Plaintiffs claimed partition as per S. 40 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 claiming 1/5th share. According to the plaintiffs, the children of REMOLD are entitled to 1/5 the share each in the said property.

(3.) THE Lower Court did not accept the claim that Remold did not the intestate; the claim of prescriptive title by defendants 3 and 4, and the contention that the succession to the estate of Remold is governed by the Cochin Christian Succession Act were also found against. On the other hand the Court held-that the succession to the estate of Remold is governed by the provisions in the Indian Succession Act 1925. THE court passed a preliminary decree for partition, but held that building No. XI/721 is not partible.