KANDASAMI NAICKER Vs. IRUSAPPA NAICKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff sued in ejectment basing his title on a. sale-deed of 1893 (Exhibit A) executed to him by the mother of the defendants Nos. 2 and 3. The plaintiff was in possession till 1909 when he was ejected forcibly by the first defendant who had obtained a sale-deed from the 2nd defendant in 1908 (Exhibit II). The sale-deed (Exhibit II) was executed by the second defendant for himself and also for the 3rd defendant who was then a minor. The second defendant attained majority in 1903, while the third defendant attained majority about the end of 1911 or the beginning of 1912. The suit was brought in July 1912.

(2.) The sale-deed by the mother of the defendants 2 and 3 to the plaintiff was executed by her as guardian of the 2nd defendant alone, the 3rd defendant (the posthumas son of his father) not having been born then. The statement of the District Judge in paragraph 2 of his judgment that the plaintiff s sale-deed was executed by the mother of the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 acting as the guardian of both is clearly an error.

(3.) Both the lower courts have found that the sale deed of 1893 in favour of the plaintiff was executed for no consideration and that the minor 2nd defendant as whose guardian his mother executed it got no benefit under it. The District Munsif dismissed the plaintiff s suit.