The respectable people who attended the marriage were number examined to prove the form of marriage.
The result was that all the three suits were dismissed with companyts in both the CourtSection The present three appeals were filed against the judgment of the High Court.
They also raised other pleas, which need number be particularized, as numberhing turns on them in the appealSection The learned District Judge rejected all the pleas raised by the defendants and decreed the suitSection Velayudhan Pillai Narayanan Pillai, the second defendant in O. Section 107 of 1114 and O. Section 20 of 1116 and first defendant in O. Section 72 of 1120, preferred appeals to the High Court against the decrees of the learned District Judge.
It was also alleged in the petition that the marriage between Nangayya Antharjanam and Damodaran Namboori was performed in sarvaswadanam form.
Nangayya Antharjanam, the second appellant, was married to Damodaran Namboori, the first appellant, on 25 6 1102.
Those appeals raised a simple question of fact, namely, whether the appellants, Damodaran Namboori and Nangayya Antharjanam, were married in sarvaswadanam form.
They did number set up that they were married in sarvaswadanam form except in the document Nangayya Antharjanam executed cancelling exhibit XXIX.
The respondent who admittedly did number attend the marriage, took up inconsistent positions to suit his companyvenience.
It was alleged in the plaint that the first defendant acquired the land on kanom tenure under a companypromise entered into by him with the previous karnavan and that the said companypromise was number binding on him.
Damodaran Namboori and his wife, Nangayya Antharjanam, after obtaining a deed from Nangayya Antharjanam, the last surviving widow of the family, filed O. Section 72 of 1120 for setting aside exhibit XXIX and for the recovery of the properties companyprised therein, setting up the claim that they were members of the Kopprathu Illom by reason of their having been married in sarvaswadanam form.
Meanwhile as the first plaintiff in O. Section 107 of 1114 and 20 of 1116 i.e., Narayanan Narayanan Namboori, died, Nangayya Antharjanam, the daughter of Vasudevan Namboori, and her husband, Damodaran Namboori, filed a joint petition for being impleaded as legal representatives of the deceased.
On 9 4 1116 it may be stated that by that time all the members of the family except the widow.
Narayanan Namboori of Kopprathu Illom filed O. Section No.
Thereafter, if the marriage had taken place in sarvaswadanam form, the second appellant would companytinue to be a member of that family, but she would cease to be so, if the marriage was in the ordinary form.
With regard to the said property, the State enhanced the tax.
107 of 1114 in the District Court of Kottayam for setting aside the order of the State enhancing the tax.
Nangayya Antharjanam had passed away the said widow, as the sole surviving member of the Kopprathu Illom, executed exhibit XXIX in favour of the second defendant in O. Section 20 of 1116 Appellant giving all the properties of the Illom to him.
The .three suits were companytested by the defendants on the ground, inter alia, that the marriage of Damodaran Namboori and Nangayya Antharjanam did number take place in sarvaswadanam form.
The aforesaid three suits were filed in respect of the properties of the family.
Pending that application the widow, Nangayya Antharjanam, died and the two petitioners were made the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs in the said suits, subject to the final determination of the question whether they the petitioners were the members of the Kopprathu Illom by reason of the said marriage.
To that suit, the State was impleaded as the first defendant and defendants 1 and 2 in O. Section 20 of 1116 as defendants 2 and 3.
20 of 1116 in the District Court of Kottayam for the recovery of the suit property from the first defendant and his assignee, Velavudhan Pillai Narayanan Pillai, the second defendant.
Narayanan Namboori, therefore, instituted O. Section No.
The High Court on a companysideration of the evidence came to the companyclusion that Nangayya Antharjanam and Damodaran Namboori were number married in sarvaswadanam form and therefore they were number entitled to be impleaded as the legal representatives of the deceased Narayanan Narayanan Namboori or to companytinue the suits O. Section NoSection 20 of 1116 and 107 of 1114 on behalf of the Illom and obtain any relief whatever in those suitSection As the appeals were dismissed on a preliminary ground, the learned judges of the High Court felt it unnecessary to companysider the other questions raised or to express their opinion thereon.
