T. RAJASEKARAN Vs. SAGOUNDALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed as against the concurrent finding of the Courts below.

(2.) The brief facts of the plaintiff case is as follows:

(3.) It is the contention of the first defendant that the Donation Deed/Gift Deed was subsequently revoked by the donor. The plaintiff has been living in the house of the respondent and the first defendant started collecting rents from the tenants. Few years before the death of the second defendant, she became very ill and she required intensive and expertise treatment. Since the Donation Deed was executed in favour of the plaintiff for maintaining the donor and as the plaintiff did not take care of the second defendant, the first defendant spent the money towards medical expenses of the second defendant and the second defendant voluntarily executed the sale deed in favour of the first defendant after she was discharged from the hospital in Salem. Hence, it is the contention of the defendants that they are only entitled to the suit property as Donation Deed has already been cancelled.