(VENKA) RAMAYYA Vs. (VENKA) NARAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts are these. The plaintiffs are reversioners to the estate of one Venkayya. When he died, his widow Papadu succeeded to his estate and alienated certain of his properties. Item No. (1) was purchased by the 1 defendant from the father of the Defendants Nos. 2 to 5 to whom Papadu had sold it. Item No. (3) was sold to Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 by Papadu herself. Papadu died more than 25 years ago. Her daughter Manickkam who then succeeded to the properties of her father executed a surrender deed, Ex. A, dated 29 January 1919, in favour of the present plaintiffs and they have sued for recovery of possession of these properties from the defendants.

(2.) The plaintiffs case is that the alienations are not binding on the reversioners and their right to succeed by inheritance is accelerated by the surrender effected by Manickkam. The District Munsif held that the surrender was neither valid nor bona fide. The learned Subordinate Judge, holding that the surrender is valid, remanded the suit for a fresh consideration of the question whether the surrender was real and bona fide. The 1 defendant appealed,

(3.) Mr. Justice Jackson dismissed the appeal in a short judgment stating that it does not appear that the point now argued was taken in the lower Court, though it may well be taken in future.