PARUKUTTY AMMA Vs. NAHA HAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have arisen from a suit for recovery of property with rent, past and future, on the basis of a Kana kychit executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiffs mother There was a renewal of the kanom, but the courts below have concurrently held the same to be void. The learned Munsiff, disallowing the prayer for recovery of possession, decreed the claim for arrears of rent for six years preceding the date of the suit; and the learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the same. Hence these Second Appeals.

(2.) S.A. No. 908 of 1956 (M) is by the 1st defendant, against the finding that the renewal of the kanom executed by the plaintiffs brother was invalid. The concurrent decision of the courts below that the renewal was neither necessary nor beneficial to the plaintiffs tarwad, is final on the question and cannot be canvassed in Second Appeal. It is common-place that properties of a tarwad are not alienable in the absence of any necessity for alienation. The declaration of invalidity of the renewal, made by the courts below has therefore to be accepted as right.

(3.) Though the plaintiff alone has instituted the suit, the decree of the courts below even so far as it goes, is in favour of the plaintiff and the 4th defendant jointly, the latter being the senior lady in the tarwad. In S.A. No. 146 of 1956(K) the plaintiff challenges the refusal of his claim for recovery of the property and the decree being made in favour of the 4th defendant jointly with himself.