CHITTUR SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD Vs. KUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An important question on Hindu Law arises in this appeal. The question is whether property obtained by a Hindu in partition of joint-family properties constitutes his separate and individual property or the properties of the joint-family consisting of himself, his wife, sons and daughters.

(2.) Plaint schedule property belongs to one Mallu, father of Pazhanimala and grandfather of first defendant. Pazhanimala died in 1963. This property along with other properties were partitioned among his sons in the year 1965. The properties were shown in the B schedule to the partition deed were set apart to the share of first defendant. Plaintiffs are the children of the first defendant born in his wife Visalakshy. The parties are Ezhavas of Chittur Taluk governed by the Hindu Mithakshara Law as modified by custom. Plaintiffs claimed four out of five shares in the property alleging that the property belongs to the joint-family constituted by the first defendant and his children.

(3.) No written statement was filed by the first defendant. The second defendant, the Secretary of a Cooperative Bank filed written statement contending that plaintiffs are not entitled to claim any share since the property had been set apart to the individual share of the first defendant. They contended that plaintiffs have no right by birth. First defendant while working as the Secretary of the Bank misappropriated large amounts and for realising the same arbitration proceedings were initiated before the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Palakkad. The properties belonging to first defendant were attached. Second defendant further contended that the remedy of plaintiffs is to file a claim petition before the Joint Registrar. According to them the suit is barred under the provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act.