KADAR Vs. MUTHUKOYA THANGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for decision in this writ petition is as to whether the decree granted by the two subordinate authorities declaring the right of the plaintiff respondent to enforce his rights to obtain personal services from the petitioner defendant is opposed to the provisions of clause (J) of Art.23 of the Constitution.

(2.) Art 23 is to the following effect:

(3.) The question arises in the following manner: The respondent instituted a suit against the petitioner as C.S. 6/46 in the Androth Amins Court, for his failure to render personal tenant services to his family and for damages for such non performance. According to the plaintiff, certain cocoanut trees and properties belonging to his family have been put in possession of the defendants family for the latters enjoyment, on condition that the members of the family render certain personal services. It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant was bound to perform one item of personal service called Nadappu, in view of the properties put in his possession and he had also to perform two other Nadappus in consequence of certain items of properties taken away from another tenant and entrusted to the defendant. According to the custom in the Island, a Nadappu is generally calculated with reference to the number of cocoanut trees held by a party from his jenmi. One Nadappu consists of a duty on the part of the defendant to sail the Odam of the landlord plaintiff carrying his goods from the Island to the Calicut Port or to any other port mentioned by the landlord. That service, as such, had to be done free of any remuneration. According to the plaintiff, the defendant defaulted in the rendering of such personal services and therefore, he wanted to obtain the said personal services enforced and also for payment of damages.