SWAMINATHAN Vs. VEMBUAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appellants are aggrieved by the decree granted in favour of the first respondent herein for 11/16th share in item No.1 of the suit property and for damages.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the appellant who was the first defendant in the suit would state even at the outset that the matter actually in controversy is only the 1/16th share in item No.1 of the suit property. THErefore, it is sufficient if the facts are stated in brief. THE appellants 1 and 2 are brother and sister, born to one Sivasami and Chengammal, the third appellant is the son of Sivasami's daughter through another wife.

(3.) I have heard the submissions made on behalf of both the parties. Ex.A-1 the sale deed in favour of the first respondent is dated 28.4.1974. The consideration for the sale is Rs.6,700 and from the recitals of the sale deed. It is seen that the value of the suit property is fixed at Rs.7,624. O.S.No.1239 of 1974 was decreed as stated earlier in 1976. The copy of the judgment is marked as Ex.A-3. In this judgment it is clearly held that the first respondent herein is entitled to the share of the first appellant in item No.1 of the suit property, which is 5/8th share. Merely because the mother of the first appellant died, the first respondent cannot claim that the increase or augmentation of share subsequent to the transfer would also be transferred to her. The share to which she is entitled to in the property gets fixed or is ascertained by the date on which the transfer was made. In the judgment reported in Chinna Pillai minor by Guardian Ramachandran Pillai v. Kalimuthu Chetti Chinna Pillai minor by Guardian Ramachandran Pillai v. Kalimuthu Chetti Chinna Pillai minor by Guardian Ramachandran Pillai v. Kalimuthu Chetti 21 MLJ. 246: 35 Mad. 47 (F.B.). It is held as follows: