MADHAVAN CHANNAR Vs. PANICKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant 1 in O.S. 245 of 1951 on the file of the Court of the District Munsiff of Haripad, seeks revision of an order passed by that Court to the effect that the suit has been properly valued and that proper court fee has been paid on the plaint. The only respondent to this revision petition is the plaintiff. Notice was given to the State in this revision and Mr. Parameswaran Pillai learned Government Pleader appeared. Besides supporting the petition generally, he had no further points or arguments to urge.

(2.) The plaintiff avers in the plaint that he and Defendants 6 to 10 are members of a divided branch of a Marumakkathayam tarwad, that pursuant to a family arrangement in that tarwad made in the year 1084 and a partition effected in the year 1125 certain properties came into the possession of the plaintiff as karanavan, that he was in management of those properties as such, that certain other properties were acquired out of the income derived by him from out of the tarwad properties under his management, and that in respect of such fresh acquisitions which were all tarwad properties, a document describing the said properties as his own and providing for his possession and enjoyment thereof until his death and for their devolution upon Defendants 1 to 3 after his death, was proposed to be brought into existence by defendants 1 to 3 who are his sons who represented to him that such a document, if executed, would enable him to secure a larger share at a partition of tarwad properties. Having agreed to this proposal, the plaint avers that the plaintiff entrusted Defendants 1 to 3 with the preparation of the said document who, accordingly got a document prepared, represented to the plaintiff that it was in accordance with the arrangement as aforesaid and even read to him portions thereof indicating its tenor as aforesaid, which was accordingly signed by the plaintiff on 8th Meenam 1122, got registered and delivered to Defendants 1 to 3. Some time afterwards, in the year 1125, there was a proposal for partition in the tarwad when the plaintiff wanted a larger share than would ordinarily be due to him and referred to the aforesaid document to found that claim. His ananthiravans, Defendant 6 onwards to whom the claim was made obtained a copy of the document which revealed that the document was not the one that the plaintiff agreed to execute and thought he was executing at the time when he affixed his signature thereto. It was discovered that the document which was got signed by him by Defendants 1 to 3 was a deed of gift which was meant to be effective and which stated that the properties were to be in the possession of the donees thereof in presenti. The suit was therefore filed by the plaintiff for declaration and other reliefs because for the aforesaid reasons the document was not binding upon him.

(3.) The plaintiff avers further that the properties mentioned in the document were and are in his continuous possession as karanavan. The reliefs asked for in the plaint are: (a) for a declaration that the gift deed dated 8th Meenam 1122 was one got executed by him by misrepresentation and fraud, that it is void, that it was not meant to nor has it come into effect and that it may be cancelled; and (b) for a perpetual injunction restraining Defendants 1 to 5 from entering into, or taking, the income from the properties.