MANI JOSHUVA Vs. MANI MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, by the plaintiff, challenging the decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kottayam, will have to be allowed because law is in his favour though it may not really accord with the real intentions of the testator namely his father whose expressions have been unfortunately not properly expressed in the Will Ext. P-3.

(2.) THE plaintiff instituted the suit in question, for a declaration of his title over the plaint schedule properties and for recovery thereof with mesne profits. At this stage it may be mentioned that the claim related to properties mentioned in two schedules that is, A schedule and B schedule. But this Court is not now concerned with the claim of the plaintiff so far as B schedules is concerned. According to the plaintiff his father executed a settlement Ext. A, dated 23-2-1111, in and by which he made a gift of certain items of properties not only in favour of the plaintiff but also in favour of his other son and wife who are defendants 1 and 2 in these proceedings.

(3.) UNDER the Will Ext. 3, the father has given 5 cents in favour of the plaintiff, which 5 cents had been originally settled under Ext. A on the first defendant. UNDER this Will the plaintiff was also given about 2 cents from and out of 9 cents which had been settled on the second defendant under Ext. A. These two Items comprised item 1 in the Will and along with those items the plaintiff was also given 4 other items. This court is not now concerned with those items at this stage.