KUTTAN PILLAI Vs. AMMAMUTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant in this second appeal. The short facts are as follows: - Survey No. 769 of Arumana village consists of 4 acres and 86 cents of garden lands. Originally it belonged to one M. Thanuvan. He created an othi over an extent of 72 cents under Ex. A -1, dated 30 -11 -1932, in favour of the first defendant, Annamuthu. Thanuvan died in 1949. Thereafter, Thanuvan's children sold 53 cents under Ex. A -2, dated 2 -2 -1963 in favour of the plaintiff (Kuttan Pillai) with a direction to redeem the othi, Ex. A -1. Therefore, he issued a notice to the first defendant, Ex. A -3 dated 30 -6 -1965 seeking to redeem Ex. A -1 othi. To this, it was replied under Ex. A -5, dated 9 -7 -1965, stating that the plaintiff was not entitled to redeem, in view of the petition filed by Thanuvan under the Travancore Debt Relief Act (Act II of 1116 ME 1940) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Hence O.S. No. 192 of 1967 was preferred to the District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai.

(2.) IN the written statement, mortgagee contended as follows: - Thanuvan, before his death, filed the petition. Ex. B -1, dated 22 -8 -1942 under the Act. The effect of that petition would be to vest all the properties of Thanuvan (debtor) in the Official Receiver. In lieu of his one -fourth share, he was allotted 19 cents which 19 cents were sold in favour of Kutti Nadar, under Ex. B -2, dated 1 -2 -1960 by the children of Thanuvan. There fore, what was sold in favour of the plaintiff was only 53 cents, i.e., 72 cents being the subject - matter of the othi, out of which 19 cents having been sold in favour of Kutti Nadar. After the proceedings under the Act, Thanuvan had no title and therefore, Ex. A -2 would be void. That being the position, the plaintiff will have right to redeem.

(3.) ON appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagarcoil, reversed the findings of the trial court and held that after the proceedings under the Act, there was no title which remained with Thanuvan and therefore, Ex. A -2, did not convey valid title and the plaintiff will not be entitled to redeem.