(1.) THE first defendant is the appellant. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of his title and for recovery of possession. The suit property was purchased by one Angammal as guardian for her minor son Muniyandi on 29th May, 1907. Muniyandi predeceased his mother and she executed a gift deed over the property on 25th April, 1952 in favour of her daughter -in -law Nachiyarammal. In the gift deed there is a reference to a daughter having been born through Muniandi and Nachiyarammal. This daughter is named Rajammal, who was the third defendant in the suit. There can be no dispute about the fact that Nachiyarammal had only a widow's estate in the said land until the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, as the gift document by Angammal, who had no rights in the property, could not enlarge Nachiyar Ammal's interest until it was enlarged by the statute. Nachiyarammal executed a settlement dated on 1st June, 1956 in favour of one Veluswami Thevar, who was the first defendant in the suit, and who is the appellant herein and also one minor daughter, Rajammal. This Veluswami Thevar is a cousin of Nachiyarammal who, after her husband's death sometime in or about 1952, had been looking after the family consisting of Nachiyarammal and her daughter Rajammal. It is stated in the document that Veluswami should marry Rajammal and that they should take the properties without any power of alienation. The male issue of the two persons would have absolute right over the property. If Veluswami did not look after the minor properly or did no t marry her after Rajammal attained puberty, then thereafter he had no interest in the suit properties. She had also made it a condition that Velusami should not alienate the properties and that if any necessity arose therefore the properties would be alienated only by Veluswami and Nachiyarammal. The settlor had declared that she had no right to cancel the settlement.
(2.) ON 23rd October, 1957 Nechiyarammal purported to cancel the said deed and thereafter executed a sale deed in favour of Ganesa Thevar on 24th November, 1958. The purchaser, Ganesa Thevar, filed a suit for declaration of his title and possession of the property and impleaded in the said suit Veluswarri Thevar and another person. This suit ultimately reached this Court in S.A. No. 1589 of 1963. By a judgment dated 18th July, 1967, construing the settlement of 1st June, 1956, this Court held that there was a transfer in present of the suit property in favour of Veluswami and Rajammal,'that the cancellation by Nachiyarammal of the said settlement deed on 23rd October, 1957 was invalid and that Nachiyarammal still retained some interest in he property because Veluswami could not by himself alienate this property. In the course of the judgment the learned Judge pointed out the following:
(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit as prayed for by the plaintiff. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the judgment of the trial Court.