KALLIANI AMMA Vs. MADHAVI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first plaintiff instituted the suit, O. S. 151 of 1954 out of which this appeal arises, for setting aside the kanam document Ext. A 1 dated the 4th May, 1954, as not binding on him. Pending the suit he died and his children were impleaded as legal representatives and as additional plaintiffs 2 & 3. The legatees under a registered Will Ext. B24 left by him were also impleaded as his legal representatives and as defendants 2 to 9. In their written statement, they reiterated the case of the first plaintiff and prayed that a decree setting aside the kanam may be granted to them and not to plaintiffs 2 and 3 whose right to represent the estate was contested by them. Afterwards an additional issue was raised as to the genuineness and validity of Ext. B24 relied on by defendants 2 to 9.

(2.) The suit was tried jointly with O. S. 105 of 1954, which was instituted by the kanam tenant against the first plaintiff to recover possession of the properties. In that suit too, on the death of the plaintiff in O. S. 151 of 1954 who was the first defendant therein, the two sets of legal representatives were impleaded as additional defendants, and a similar issue concerning Ext. B24 was raised. The two suits were tried and disposed of by a common judgment by the court of first instance. In O. S. 151 of 1954 with which alone this second appeal is concerned, the kanam was held to be valid and as not liable to attack; that court also found Ext. B24 to be true and valid. In the result it gave a decree in the following terms:

(3.) In second appeal by defendants 2 to 9, it was contended that the appeal before the Subordinate Judge by plaintiffs 2 and 3, that they are the only legal representatives of the first plaintiff was incompetent. The Rule in the Civil Procedure Code applicable in such cases is O.22 R.5 which enacts that: