ABDULLA Vs. AYISUMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 6th defendant in O.S. No. 315 of 1942, a suit for partition, is the appellant before us. The appeal arises out of R.E.P. No. 121 of 1954 in R.I.A. No. 819 of 1949 on the file of the District Munsiff of Hosdrug. The appellant's contention that his possession of items 2, 5, 8, 9 and 10 of the C schedule to the final decree in O.S. No. 315 of 1942 was not liable to be disturbed in execution of the said decree was accepted by the District Munsiff of Hosdrug in R.E.P. No. 121 of 1954 and rejected by the District Judge of South Kanara in A.S. No. 102 of 1955. It is common ground that when O.S. No. 315 of 1942 was instituted items 2, 5, 8, 9 and 10 of the C schedule were in the possession of tenants, that the tenants concerned were not parties to the suit, and that the appellant purchased the tenancy rights subsequent to the institution of the suit by Exts. B4, B5, B6 and B7. Ext. B4 dated 24 -6 -1942 relates to items 2, 8 and 9. Exts. B5 and B6, both dated 19 -10 -1942, relate to item No. 5, and Ext. B7 dated 26 -11 -1942 relates to item No. 10.

(2.) THE District Munsiff dealt with the appellant's contention as follows: -

(3.) IN , A.I.R. 1949 Mad 586 a Full Bench of the Madras High Court said: