Skip to content


Koroth Amman Kutti Vs. Perungottil Appu Nambiar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1906)ILR29Mad322
AppellantKoroth Amman Kutti
RespondentPerungottil Appu Nambiar and anr.
Cases ReferredKunhacha Umma v. Kutti Mammi Hajee I.L.R.
Excerpt:
malabar law - effect of a gift of property to a female and her children--such property not assets for the debts of a deceased member. - .....sons to pay the debt out of the assets of the deceased. the decree-holder now seeks to execute his decree by attachment of the share of koram nambiar in the properties above referred to.2. the district judge has held that unichira and her sons formed a separate tarward by reason of their having obtained these properties on gift and therefore koram nambiar had no interest available for attachment and sale.3. we are unable to agree with the district judge in his view that when a female and some of or all her children obtain any property from their father or karnavan as in this case, they are thereby constituted into a tarward by themselves, the senior member among them having the ordinary rights of the karnavan of a malabar tarward so far as the other members in his branch are concerned.4......
Judgment:

1. In this case one Unichira and her three sons obtained certain lands on gift. After the death of one of the sons Koram Nambiar, a decree was obtained against one of the surviving sons to pay the debt out of the assets of the deceased. The decree-holder now seeks to execute his decree by attachment of the share of Koram Nambiar in the properties above referred to.

2. The District Judge has held that Unichira and her sons formed a separate Tarward by reason of their having obtained these properties on gift and therefore Koram Nambiar had no interest available for attachment and sale.

3. We are unable to agree with the District Judge in his view that when a female and some of or all her children obtain any property from their father or Karnavan as in this case, they are thereby constituted into a Tarward by themselves, the senior member among them having the ordinary rights of the Karnavan of a Malabar Tarward so far as the other members in his branch are concerned.

4. The case Kunhacha Umma v. Kutti Mammi Hajee I.L.R. 16 Mad. 201 referred to by the Judge is not an authority for that proposition. It only decides that these persons hold such properties with the ordinary incidents of Tarward property. In that case as here, the decree was obtained against the assets of the deceased member. And that is an authority accordingly for the proposition that when a member dies, his interest in the property survives to the others and is no longer available for attachment at the instance of a decree-holder. To that extent we are bound by that decision and we must accordingly hold that the orders of the lower Courts are right and dismiss this appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //