ADHIKARI NARAYANAMMA Vs. ADHIKARI THABITINAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's appeal against the concurrent decisions of the Courts below, arising out of a suit for declaration of title, and recovery of possession and for mesne profits.

(2.) PLAINTIFF is the wife of the defendant. Their marriage on 6-3-1952 is admitted. Plaintiffs case is that at the time of the marriage, her husband the defendant gifted the suit-property to her out of love and affection and later on executed the deed of gift (Ext. 1) which was duly registered and delivered to the plaintiff and she was in enjoyment of the property until 1956 when the defendant deserted her and unauthorisedly occupied the suit land. Hence the plaintiffs suit for the reliefs aforesaid.

(3.) THE defendant denied the gift, though he admitted the execution and registration of the deed of gift. His case, however, is that before the marriage of the plaintiff, her father demanded five Tolas of gold from the defendant who agreed to give the same within twenty days of the marriage. As the defendant was unable to arrange the gold, the plaintiff's father did not allow her to come to the house of the defendant. Under permission of the plaintiff's father, the defendant agreed to execute the gift (gift Ex. 1) by way of security for the five tolas of gold demanded by the plaintiff's father. Ext. 1 was never meant to be treated as the deed of gift, nor did the defendant intend to divest himself of the property covered by Ext. 1. The plaintiff never accepted the gift her was the possession of the property ever delivered to her. A few weeks after the) execution of Ext. 1, the defendant gave to the the five tolas of gold and thus Ext. 1 which was meant to be treated as a security was automatically redeemed.