JEEVARATHNAMMAL Vs. NVARADA PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In spite of all that the learned Counsel for the respondents had urged, he has not persuaded me that the conclusion which I formed on the last occasion on the materials then before me is incorrect. I have been in fact unable to come to any other conclusion. I still feel that even if the Full Bench had not decided that Exhibits XII and XII (a) were relevant, I should come to the conclusion that an adequate case of adverse possession by Doraisani Ammal has been made out, especially after my learned brother has cleared up the obvious mistake which, I think, both the Counsel and the Judges committed at the last trial, namely, that the Will of Rajammal purported to deal with the suit property. I think there can be but one effect given to the recitals in the Will, and that is that they show the knowledge of the ladies that they were not in possession and that they received the rents not on their own behalf, bat on behalf of Doraisani Animal.

(2.) The appeal will be allowed with costs throughout.

(3.) The petitions are dismissed. Srinivasa Aiyangar, J.