NEELAKANTA PILLAI Vs. MADHAVAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the plaintiff in O. S. 44 of 1957, Additional Sub Court, Mavelikara against the dismissal of his suit for declaration of title and for recovery of possession with mesne profits of the suit properties, which are Kandukrishi pattom lands. The lands in question, had been acquired by the plaintiff's maternal grandfather in the year 1044. On the extinction of the acquirer's tarwad, a suit for recovery of possession of the property was filed against the elder brother of the plaintiff alleging that the property had been leased to him. In the said suit the members of the plaintiff's tarwad pleaded that there was a gift of the properties to them. The said plea was found against, but the suit was dismissed on the finding that the properties were not held under the lease deed. Ext. A is a copy of the judgment of the High Court of Travancore which evidences these facts. Thereafter by a Nichayapatrom, Ex. D dated 3-1-1091 in the plaintiff's tarwad, the properties were to be enjoyed by the successive karanavans of the tarwad for the time being. The karanavan at the time of Ex. D was one Govinda Pillai who died in 1108 and was succeeded by one Sankara Pillai. Sankara Pillai executed a lease deed Ex. 11 dated 8-8-1108 (copy of which is Ex. E) to the first defendant. Sankara Pillai died in 1110 and was succeeded by the next karanavan Velayudhan Pillai. By a Nichayapatrom Ex. G dated 11-12-115 Velayudhan Pillai conveyed his life interest and his right to be in possession in favour of his nephew Damodaran Pillai. Velayudhan Pillai died in 1122 and Damodaran Pillai in 1128. Damodaran Pillai sued the first defendant in O. S. 108 of 1116 for recovery of possession with arrears of rent (Be it noted that this suit was not based on Ex. II but on the lease deed Ex. F, in respect of which, it was common case, as is recorded in Para.4 of the judgment of the Trial Court, that the same was not acted upon). The suit O. S. 108/1116 was compromised as evidenced by Ex. L dated 1-4-1119. By the terms of the said compromise, item 2 of the plaint schedule property was surrendered by the first defendant to Damodaran Pillai and Damodaran Pillai gave up all rights in respect of item 1 in favour of the first defendant.

(2.) Pending the above suit Damodaran Pillai and the first defendant had applied for transfer of registry which was eventually granted by the Government to the first defendant in respect of item 1, and to Damodaran Pillai's wife (2nd defendant) in respect of item 2, Damodaran Pillai himself having died before the final order directing mutation of names was passed. This is evidenced by Ex. XIX dated 29th September 1950. Defendants 3 to 11 are the children of Damodaran Pillai and the 12th defendant is the person in possession.

(3.) The plaintiff is the next senior in age to Velayudhan Pillai and also the sole member of the family at the time of the institution of the present suit. He laid the suit on the ground that the rights of the first defendant as the lessee had come to an end on the death of Sankara Pillai, that in any event, the same had terminated as a result of the compromise evidenced by Ext. L, and that he is therefore entitled to recover possession of the properties.