NARASIMHAN NAMBOODIRI Vs. GANAPATHI NAMBOODIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Substantial questions of law formulated in the second appeal at the time of admission are as follows:

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) Plaintiffs case is that though the plaint schedule properties were owned by the plaintiff, and that plaint B schedule is a part of plaint A schedule property. Defendant is the younger brother of the plaintiff. On 13.2.1981 the plaintiff had executed and registered a sale deed in respect of plaint A schedule properties as a sham transfer in favour of the defendant. Originally, the plaint averment shows that the plaintiff challenged the sale deed on the ground that it is a benami transaction. Subsequently, the plaint was amended and necessary averments were inserted substituting the nature of the transaction describing the transaction as a sham transfer.