(1.) This appeal has been referred to this Bench because Mohan J. before whom it came up for hearing, was of the view that there is a difference of opinion between Ananchaperumal v. Muthiah, 1944 Trav LR 595; (34 Trav LJ 503) (FB) and Shanmughathayee Animal v. Devasahayarn Nadar, AIR 1954 Trav Co 497: ILR (1954) Trav Co 826 (FB), on the question whether custom prevalent among the Hindu Nadar Christians in the matter of succession is obliterated by reason of the Travancore Christian Succession Act (Travancore Act 11 of 1092 M. E.) and hence an authoritative ruling by a Bench' of this court would be highly desirable.
(2.) The 3rd defendant in 0. S. No. 18 of 1968 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram, who succeeded before the trial Court, but lost the case before the Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram, in A. S. No. 245 of 1972 on the file of this court is the appellant. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to in the order of their array in the trial Court.
(3.) The brief narration of facts required for determination of the question. of law is as given under. One Ponnammal under the original of Ex. B-2 dated 2951095 M, E., had purchased the suit property corresponding to 13-1-1920. This Ponnammal was originally married to a person of Poothapandi and through him she had a son and a daughter by name Gnanaprakasi who later embrased the Christian faith. After the death of her husband, Ponnammal married a second husband, by name, Elapyaperumal and through him she had two sons, viz. the first defendant (Kutti Nadar) and one Poliah Nader. Ponnammal died in or about the year 1099 M. E.