KANTHAMMAL Vs. MEENAKSHISUNDARAMIER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE property in dispute was given by the donor to his daughter in these words: "THEse properties...having been gifted to you and delivered possession of to you, yourself and your santhathikalam puthira powthira parampariyamaya may enjoy the same, without creating any encumbrance, sale, etc.

(2.) THESE words, as laid down in Kannu Pillay v. Chellatkammal 10 M.LJ. 203, are words of limitation in accordance with the ruling of the Privy Council with reference to similar Bengalee words "Puthra pouthradhi kranu". No doubt, the donor laid down a condition that the donee and her heirs should not alienate the property but that must be treated as a repugnant condition and, therefore, invalid. We do not think that the gift in this ease can be properly construed as conferring only a life-estate on the daughter Periakrishnamma. We, therefore, set aside the decree of the District Judge and restore that of the District Munsif with costs here and in the Court below.