RAGHAVAN Vs. CHIRUTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiffs 2 to 5 in O.S. No. 75 of 1982, Munsiffs Court, Kuthuparamba, are the appellants in this appeal. The first plaintiff and the defendants in the suit are the respondents herein.

(2.) The following questions have been formulated as substantial questions of law in the appeal memorandum:

(3.) The suit was one for partition and for separate allotment of plaintiffs' 21/56 shares. The plaintiffs, defendants 1 to 5, the father of defendants 6 to 8 and father of defendants 21 and 22 are members of Parayikandy tarwad. A registered 'nischaya karar' dated 31-10-1927 (Ext. A2) was entered into between the members of the Parayikandy tarwad; thereby the properties were divided into three Schedules and set apart to three groups. The plaintiffs alleged that it was for the maintenance of the members. The plaintiffs contended that Ext. A2 is only an arrangement for maintenance. According to the contesting defendants (defendants 17,20 and 21), Ext. A2 dated 31-10-1927 is a partition, the crucial question that arose for consideration was whether Ext. A2 dated 31-10-1927 is a partition or only a maintenance arrangement. If it was a partition deed, the present suit for partition will not lie; if on the other hand, Ext. A2 was only a maintenance arrangement, the suit was competent. The Trial Court held that Ext. A2 is a partition deed and dismissed the suit by judgment dated 14-6-1985. The plaintiffs carried the matter by way of appeal before the District Court, Tellicherry. The appellate court concurred with the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and held that Ext. A2 is a partition deed. It is thereafter, the plaintiffs have filed the above second appeal.