LAWS(MAD)-1992-11-31

MANGATHAYEE ALIAS KANNAMMAL Vs. GOVINDARAJI MUDALIAR

Decided On November 16, 1992
MANGATHAYEE ALIAS KANNAMMAL Appellant
V/S
GOVINDARAJI MUDALIAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant. Though her suit O. S. No. 9 of l976 on the file of the District Munsif, Cheyyar was decreed, the decree was reversed by the Subordinate Judge, Vellore in A. S. No. 40 of 1978,. preferred by the defendants and the suit was dismissed.

(2.) THE plaintiff claimed title to the suit properties basing on Ex. A-1, the registered settlement deed, dated 2. 8. 1951, executed by munusamy Naidu, the father of the plaintiff, covering all the three items of the suit properties. No doubt, on the date of Ex. A-1, the plaintiff was not alive, she having been born on 2s. 8. 1955. But the relevant recital in Ex. A-1 is as follows: (i. e. Munusamy Naidu and his wife) So, according to the plaintiff under Ex. A-1 life interest in the suit properties has been given to the settlor's wife and the settlor himself and after their lifetime, their children to be born are to get the vested interest in those properties. No doubt, there was another elder brother of the plaintiff. But, it appears that he had died in the year 1953 itself. So, according to the plaintiff she is the only surviving child of her abovesaid parents and the said parents having already died the plaintiff alone is entitled to the suit properties. As per ex. A-3, the mother of the plaintiff died on 3. 11. 1957 and it appears that subsequently, her father also died.

(3.) FURTHER, on the second question, it is quite clear that the suit properties are not the joint family properties of the family of the plaintiff and her father. Under, Ex. A-1, the plaintiff has got absolute interest in the properties, after the lifetime of her parents. Therefore, it has to be held that these properties are her own exclusive properties and in such circumstances the existence of family benefit or family necessity, even assuming cannot validate Exs. B-1 and B-6. FURTHER, pursuant to Sec. 8 of the hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, without the prior permission of the court, the minor's property cannot be sold away by the parents.