RAMANKUTTY PURUSHOTHAMAN Vs. AMMINIKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 2 and 3 in OS No. 660 of 1979 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Sherthallai are the appellants and Respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs. The third respondent is the first defendant in the case. The plaint allegations are as follows:

(2.) The first defendant did not file any written statement. He remained ex parte. Defendants 2 and 3 filed a joint written statement. Their contention are as follows: The first defendant has another wife. The order in MC 13/72 was obtained in collusion between the first plaintiff and the first defendant and the same is not binding on defendants 2 and 3 and plaint schedule properties. The allegation that the sale deeds in favour of defendants 2 and 3 are executed fraudulently and benami in the name of defendants 2 and 3 is not true and is denied. Item No. 1 was purchased by the 2nd defendant as per Ext.B2 dated 18.1.1973 from the first defendant and his father. Similarly, Item No. 2 was purchased by the 3rd defendant from the first defendant and his father as per Ext.B2. The sale deeds are genuine and bona fide transactions. They were executed for valuable consideration and no decree charged on the properties can be passed.

(3.) The Trial Court passed the decree in terms of the plaint, and to realise the amount from the first defendant charging on the plaint schedule properties. Against that defendants 2 and 3 filed an appeal. The appeal was heard by the Sub Court, Shertallai and the decree of the Trial Court was confirmed. Hence, this second appeal is filed.