K.V.(KUNHI VEETTIL) REMANI Vs. KOONAMKANDY ARJUNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises from the judgment and decree of the Additional District Court, Thalassery in A.S.No.133 of 2007 confirming the judgment and decree for fixation of boundary and for recovery of possession of item No.3 of the plaint schedule, granted by the Principal Munsiff's Court, Kannur in O.S.No.301 of 2004.

(2.) The 1st respondent/plaintiff filed the suit against the appellant/1st defendant and respondents 2 to 4/defendants 2 to 4 for fixation of boundary and recovery of possession of the item No.3. The trial court granted a decree as prayed for which the first appellate court has confirmed.

(3.) The case in short is that item Nos.1 to 3 originally belonged to one Sankaran Nair. From the said Sankaran Nair, the said properties were taken on lease by Hussain. Later, Kottan who is the maternal grandfather of the 1st respondent/plaintiff, along with the appellant/1st defendant purchased lease hold right over the said properties as per Ext.A1. The appellant released her undivided half right over the said properties to Kottan as per Ext.A2. Thus Kottan became the absolute owner in possession of the suit property. Kottan assigned 13= cents (item No.1) as per Ext.A3 to Janaki, the mother of the 1st respondent/plaintiff. Janaki got purchase certificate from the Land Tribunal, Thalassery (Ext.A4). Janaki assigned 1> cents to the 3rd respondent/3rd defendant as per Ext.A5. Kottan gifted 5= cents in R.S.No.88/7 and 2= cents in R.S.No.88/3 to the appellant as per Ext.A6. Later, Kottan as per Ext.A7, gift deed conveyed 5= cents in R.S.No.88/5 to Janaki, the mother of the 1st respondent/plaintiff. The appellant assigned 8= cents in R.S.No.88/7 and another item in R.S.No.88/5. According to the 1st respondent, the appellant had no right or authority over any property exceeding 5= cents in R.S.No.88/7 as per Ext.A6 and hence she could not assign anything in excess of what she obtained as per Ext.A6. The excess land conveyed by the appellant claiming to be comprised in R.S.No.88/7 is the property described as item No.3 of the plaint schedule and which the 1st respondent sought recovery of possession on the strength his title.