SIVAPRASAD Vs. KARTHIYAYANI @ KARTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Intriguing legal questions in this appeal revolve around the interpretation of the terms in Ext.B1, a sale deed.

(2.) Shorn off unnecessary details, short facts are thus: Appellants are the defendants 1 and 2 in a suit for setting aside documents, consequential injunction and also for partition of certain immovable properties. Deceased Paru is the mother of plaintiff, 2nd defendant and Lakshmikutty. A couple of years before the suit, Lakshmikutty died, leaving behind two children, who are defendants 3 and 4. 1 st defendant is the son of 2 nd defendant. Parties are members of Hindu Ezhava Community.

(3.) Plaintiff contended that the plaint A and B schedule properties belonged to deceased Paru. She obtained the property as per a registered document of the year 1121 Malayalam Era (M.E.), corresponding to 1946 AD. After Paru's death, the property devolved on her children. On the death of Lakshmikutty, the daughter of Paru, her rights devolved on defendants 3 and 4. The properties, therefore, are in the joint ownership of the parties to the suit. In the property, a residential building, owned by deceased Paru, is situated, wherein the defendants 1 and 2 are residing. Parties are in joint possession of the properties.