LAWS(MAD)-1925-10-21

RAMA IYER Vs. NARAYANASWAMI IYER

Decided On October 15, 1925
RAMA IYER Appellant
V/S
NARAYANASWAMI IYER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit by the reversioners of one Anantha krishna Aiyar for possession of his properties after the death of the last intermediate female in 1918. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs appeal.

(2.) Ananthakrishna Aiyar died in 1858 leaving a widow and two daughters. The widow died about 1868-70. Her first daughter died in 1902. She had three sons, all of whom died before 1918 leaving no issue. The second daughter died in 1918 leaving the five plaintiffs surviving her. They are, therefore, reversioners to the estate of Anantha krishna Aiyar and are prima facie entitled to his properties. The following pedigree shows these facts at a glance: <TAB> ANANTHAKRISHNA AIYAR, died 1858, | widow Thayammal, | died 1868-70. | Two daughters | __________________________________________ | | Thailammal, Lakshmi Amnlal, died 1902 died 1918 | _______________________________ | | | | | Ramaswami Vaidianatha Another. | Iyer Iyer | Died before 1918. | | _____________ | _________________________________________________ | | | | | Rama Subramania Muthu Srinivasa Sundara Iyer. Iyer. Iyer. Iyer. Iyer. |________________________________________________| Plaintiffs</TAB>

(3.) The facts on which the defendants resist the suit are as follows: On 22nd July, 1867, the widow executed four documents (Exs. III, IV, V and VI). By Ex. III, she purported to sell her house to her eldest grandson Ramaswami Iyer for Rs. 400. The object of this sale was ostensibly to pay off Rs. 300 promised to Lakshmi Ammal at the time of her marriage and Rs. 100 similarly to Thailammal. By Ex. V she conveyed lands in Radhanallur worth Rs. 380 and moveables of the value of Rs. 20 to the same Ramaswami Iyer in consideration of his having performed the funerals of Anantha krishna Iyer and of his undertaking to perform also her funerals. In Anaithavandavapuram she had pangu of lands. She gave away 1/4th pangu to Ramaswami Iyer by Ex. VI and the other 1/4th pangu to Rama Iyer (the eldest son of the 2nd daughter) by Ex. V. The defendants contend that these documents amount to a surrender by Thayammal accelerating the reversion; they also amount to a bona fide family settlement and that no reversion devolved on plaintiffs in 1918. The plaintiffs are also said to be estopped. The Subordinate Judge upheld these contentions.