SHAMSUDHEEN Vs. HASSANKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in a suit for cancellation of a decree in O.S. No. 49/1997 of the Munsiff Court, Pattambi (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') and for other consequential reliefs is the appellant herein.

(2.) In the suit, the plaintiff sought for cancellation of a decree for partition contending that one of the items in the partition decree was under his sole ownership and possession as per Exts.A2 to A4 assignment deeds executed by the legal heirs of late Fathima Beevi. Certain properties owned by Kuhnjayamu Master were gifted by him in favour of his daughter Fathima Beevi as per Ext.A1 assignment deed. Upon the death of Fathima Beevi, Exts.A2 to A4 assignment deeds were executed by her legal heirs in favour of the plaintiff.

(3.) The plaintiff contended that fraud was played on the court by the plaintiff in the earlier suit and hence, sought for cancellation of the decree. The trial court held that the suit for cancellation is not maintainable at the instance of a person, who is not a party to the instrument or a person, who is claiming under the executor of the document. In other words, the plaintiff cannot seek for cancellation of the document in which he is not a party to the suit and his remedy is to seek for declaration that he is not affected by the document.