DAMODARAN NAMBOOTHIRI Vs. ULAHANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the complainant against an order of acquittal.

(2.) The complainant is the Manager of the Poovakulam Devaswom. The complainants case is that the accused with a view to take forcible possession of the property trespassed on the western portion of Survey Number 323/2-3, in Kochukunnu Purayidom and ploughed the land thereby destroying six beds of tender coconut plants and six other beds prepared for the purpose of planting. The entire purayidom covering an extent of 84 cents was taken delivery of by the Devaswom on 15-3-1955 in execution of the decree in O.S. 6 of 1102 obtained by the Devaswom against one Sankaran Nair Parameswaran Nair. Ext. P4 is the copy of the delivery kychit. On 5-4-1955 accused 1 to 3 in the case executed a registered lease deed for the western 39 3/4 cents of the property fora period of twelve years agreeing to pay a rent of Rs. 5/- 1 and 2 reside.

(3.) The plea of the accused was that the third accused who had taken a lease of the entire 84 cents in 1117 from Sankaran Nair Parameswaran Nair the judgment - debtor in O. S.6 of 1102 had given that property as dowry to accused 2 his daughter who was given in marriage to accused 1 and accused 1 and 2 were in possession all along. According to them though Parameswaran Nair had obtained the decree in O.S. 144 of 1122 for recovery of the property from the third accused the property was not taken delivery of by him and as such there was no possibility of the Devaswom having come into possession of the property in pursuance of Ext. P4 delivery kychit. They sought to explain the execution of Ext. P1 lease deed by saying that it was fraudulently brought into existence at the instance of the Devaswom authorities and without making them aware of the contents of the document.