RAMAN SAMEERANAN Vs. RAMAN VARUNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiffs appeal against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Attingal reversing the decree of the Trial Court.

(2.) Plaintiff and the first defendant obtained properties from their father, under two settlement deeds namely, Ext. A dated 3-6-1112 comprising A schedule properties and Ex. B dated 8-12-1114 comprising B schedule properties.

(3.) The first defendant, who is the brother of the plaintiff, conveyed the entire properties comprised under Exts. A and B to the second defendant, who is the second wife of the father of the plaintiff and the first defendant for a sum of Rs. 50 as is evidenced by Ext. C dated 20-9-1120. The second defendant in turn, conveyed these properties under two documents to two different parties. Under Ext. D dated 19-11-1120, the second defendant conveyed half of B schedule properties namely 28 cents, (B schedule being 56 cents in extent) to the third defendant and under Ext. E dated 5-8-1121, she conveyed the rest of the B schedule properties of 28 cents and the whole of A schedule properties of an extent of 56 cents to the 4th defendant. The present suit was brought by the plaintiff, the brother of the first defendant, to set aside the two sale deeds, namely, Exts. D and E on the ground that the rights conferred under the settlement deed Ext. C was a joint right in respect of all the properties in favour of the plaintiff and the first defendant and as such, the first defendant has no right to convey any properties to the second defendant.