MAMMAD Vs. KAICHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O.S.No.763/1997 before the Principal Munsiff Court -I, Kozhikode is the appellant. The suit is one for recovery of possession on the strength of title. The facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows.

(2.) THE predecessor in interest of the plaintiff and the predecessor in interest of the defendants by Ext.B1 partition deed partitioned the property among them and item No.1 was set apart to the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff and item No.2 to the predecessor in interest of the defendants. The case appears to be that there was an exchange deed executed between the parties by Exts.A4 and B2 whereby the brothers exchanged certain items of properties between them. The claim made by the plaintiff is that the predecessor in interest of the defendants exchanged a portion of the property obtained under partition in exchange of the properties owned by the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff. Based on Ext.A1 dated 08.08.1977, the plaintiff claimed right over the property covered by Ext.A4 and laid the suit alleging that the defendants trespassed into a portion of the B schedule property and seeking appropriate reliefs.

(3.) THE defendants resisted the suit by pointing out that the author of Ext.A1 did not get the extent of property as claimed by the author but had only a lesser extent of property. They also disputed the allegation of trespass and pointed out that the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief.