KOYYOTTAN SOOPPI Vs. VANIYATHI KALLYANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in 0. S. 1062 of 1945, District Munsiff's court, Kuthuparamba is the appellant before us. THE short point for consideration in the appeal is regarding the title to the properties comprised in the Stridhanam Gift deed, Ext. B5 dated 30th June, 1925. THE following geneological table, as supplied by the appellant's counsel will help us to appreciate (he relationship of the parties who will be referred to in this judgment. Table:#1 It will be seen from the table that Pathumma and Mayan had a daughter Ummayya and four sons Avulla, Abooker, Moidu and Ahamad. Ummayya had a daughter Aliyumma and a son Ahmad. Aliyumma was married to Koyyotan sooppi who is the plaintiff-appellant before us. Aliyumma's brother, Ahmad was the 2nd defendant in the suit. After Pathumma's death, her husband Mayan, along with his 2nd son Abooker and as guardian of his minor sons Moidu and Ahmad executed a document styled Stridhanam Gift Deed in favour of Aliyumma, granddaughter of Pathumma and Mayan through their daughter Ummayya who was also by then dead. THE legal effect of this document will be considered later in the judgment. At this stage, it may be mentioned that the said document recites that the property comprised therein belonged to Pathumma and that after her death, it belongs to the executants and to Avulla, the eldest son of Pathumma and Mayan. It further states that it has been given as gift to Aliyumma to provide maintenance to her husband Koyyotan Sooppi. It makes certain further recitals as to the manner of enjoyment and as to the devolution of the property.

(2.) THE property appears to have been demised on lease to one Govindan and another in favour of Avulla. Avulla, the eldest son of pathumma and Mayan and who had not joined the original Stridhanam Gift Deed ext. 65, executed on 27-4-1931 a registered Deed in favour of Aliyumma affirming the earlier Gift Deed executed in her favour by his father and other brothers. This consent deed has been filed and marked as Ext. B5 in these proceedings. Govindan, the original lessee appears to have died and the properties were in the possession of the 1st defendant as lessee. Aliyumma also appears to have died and her death gave rise to a dispute among the parties as to the ownership of the properties covered by Ext B5 and B6.

(3.) THE 1st defendant contended that the 2nd defendant alone is the sole heir of Aliyumma and she also pleaded discharge by payments of rent already made to the 2nd defendant. THE 2nd defendant supported the 1st defendant and also admitted the receipt of rent.