SABARIANANDAM NADAR MARTARULAPPAN NADAR Vs. CHELLACHAMI NADACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Letters Patent appeal is against the judgment of Alagiriswami, J. , allowing s. A. No. 356 of 1963. The suit out of which this appeal had arisen, is one for declaration of title and for redemption. The suit property originally belonged to a tarwad by name Thelukkada Parakkavilakathu Veetu tarwad. The Karnavan of that tarwad had created two othis on one and the same date, namely, 9-8-1099 M. E. corresponding to 1924, under Exs. A-1 and A-2 respectively over portions of the suit property in favour of two third parties by name Mathavan Pillai and umayamma.

(2.) KUMARA Pillai was a junior member of the said tarwad. There was a partition of the tarwad properties under Ex. A-3, dated 21-3-1104 M. E. (1928) and the suit property fell to the share of the above Kumara Pillai. The present plaintiff's father was one of the creditors of the said Kumara Pillai and he filed a suit in O. S. 1721 of 1103 for recovery of money and the suit property was attached. Ex. A. 4 shows that the said attachment was on 2-4-1104 M. E. A few days after this attachment, the said Kumara Pillai presented an insolvency petition and ultimately he was adjudged insolvent. The presentation of the petition was on 8-4-1104 (ME) as seen from Ex. B-6 and the adjudication was on 14-11-1104 (ME) as seed from Exhibit B7. Later, the Official Receiver made a report to the insolvency court that there were no assets of the insolvent to be administered, that on further proceedings need to taken, and that the proceedings might be closed. The insolvency court recorded this report, after which for all practical purposes the insolvency proceedings had been terminated.

(3.) IN pursuance of the decree obtained in O. S. 1721 of 1103, the equity of redemption, which had been attached earlier, was brought to sale and the plaintiff's father who was the decree-holder himself, purchased the same on 8-81117 (ME) (1942), as evidence by Ex. A-5. Symbolical delivery of the equity of redemption was effected in favour of the plaintiff's father on 17-11-1119 (1944), as evidenced by Ex. A-6. The plaintiff who succeeded to the interest of his father, is now claiming redemption of the two othis under Exs. A-1 and A-2.