LAWS(KER)-1971-8-27

P KUNHAMMAD Vs. V MOOSANKUTTY

Decided On August 12, 1971
P.KUNHAMMAD Appellant
V/S
V.MOOSANKUTTY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These second appeals arise out of a suit for partition filed by the widow of a member of a Mappila Marumakkathayam tarwad for partition and separate possession of 1/36th share in the tavazhi properties. The plaintiff died during the pendency of the suit and the 5th defendant, one of her sons, was transposed as supplemental second plaintiff.

(2.) The Trial Court directed a preliminary decree to be passed as prayed for subject to the findings on issues 11 and 14. In appeal, the 2nd plaintiff and defendants 4, 6 and 7 were found not entitled to any share in the properties. So also defendants 13, 20 and 21 were found not entitled to any share in the plaint properties. S. A. No. 444 of 1966 has been filed by the 2nd plaintiff and defendants 4, 6 and 7 and S. A. 648 of 1966 has been filed by defendants 13, 20 and 21 questioning the correctness of the lower appellate Court's finding declaring them not to be entitled to any share in the plaint properties.

(3.) The relationship between the parties may now be noticed. The tavazhi was descended from the common ancestress Kunhipathumma, who had three sons and a daughter, Kunhikammadamma. We are concerned in this second appeal only with the descendants of the daughter Kunhikammadamma. She had six children, Ahammadkutty Hajee, Sooppikutty, Mammu, Abdulla Abdurahiman and Kadeesa. The original plaintiff was the widow of Sooppikutty and her children are defendants 4 to 7. On the death of the original plaintiff, 5th defendant was transposed as supplemental 2nd plaintiff. The 2nd plaintiff and defendants 4, 6 and 7 forming a group are the appellants in S. A. No. 444 of 1966. The 8th defendant is the widow of Ahammadkutty Hajee and defendants 9 to 19 are her children. The 13th defendant is the widow of Kunhikutty Ali, one among the five children of Kadeesa, the daughter of Kunhikammadamma. Defendants 20 and 21 are the children of 13th defendant by Kunhikutty Ali and it is this group consisting of defendants 13, 20 and 21 who are the appellants in S. A. No. 648 of 1966.