RAJEEV Vs. BHARATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S.No.45/2002 who suffered a decree at the hands of the Munsiff Court, Haripad which was confirmed in appeal is the appellant. The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows.

(2.) ONE Velayudhan was the owner of the suit property. His wife was Bharathi and he had two children in the wedlock namely, Suresh and Sujatha. As per the averment in the plaint, by Ext.A1 gift deed dated 22.07.1957, Velayudhan gifted the property which he is owned to two of his children who were minors at the relevant time. However, Velayudhan reserved his rights to take income from the property till his life time. It would appear from the records that later on Velayudhan left the company of the plaintiff in the suit, the legally wedded wife of Velayudhan, and took up residence with one Ponnamma in which relationship the defendant was born.

(3.) AS per the allegations, Velayudhan and Ponnamma executed Ext.B1 sale deed dated 29.12.1992 in favour of defendant. The recital in the document shows that Velayudhan acquired the share left by Suresh who was not heard of for a long time and was presumed to be dead. The plaintiff, who is the legally wedded wife of Velayudhan, instituted the suit seeking to restrain the defendant from interfering with the possession of plaintiff of the plaint schedule property on the ground that even assuming that Suresh is presumed to be dead, Velayudhan does not inherit any right over the property and the plaintiff being a class 1 heir of Suresh is entitled to the share of Suresh. She therefore laid the suit for declaration and injunction.