SANTHAKUMAI AMMA Vs. KALYANI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant. THE suit tinder 0. 21 r. 103 CPC. is to set aside the summary order Ext. A12 passed under 0. 21 R. 98 cpc. as it stood prior to the CPC. Amendment Act, 1976.

(2.) THE suit property belonged in Jenm to defendants 1 to

(3.) THE trial court in Para. 17 of its judgment summed up its reasons as follows: "thus, summing up the positions. I have no hesitation in recording a conclusion that although Ext. A3 karar brought about severance is status, the right of management still remained with the tavazhi". It is for that reason that the trial court held that the order of removal for resistance of the plaintiff cannot be set aside in the present suit. THE appellate court concluded that Madhavi Amma was impleaded in the suit as Karanavathi of the tavazhi, the omission to describe her as karanavathi does not alter her character as Karanavathi and that there was nothing in evidence to show that defendants 1 to 3 had knowledge about Ext. A3 partition entered into among Madhavi Amma and others. It was accordingly held that there was no malafides on the part of defendants 1 to 3 in not impleading the other members of the tavazhi and the decree should therefore be binding on all the members of the erstwhile tavazhi. It is in this view of the matter that the decree of the trial court dismissing the suit was confirmed.