the relevant facts are that the suit property belonged to one veerammal.
during her minumberity kandayya sold the property on 29.10.1959 to jainulavudeen.
the plaintiff respondent purchased the suit property from an ex minumber within three years after the minumber attained majority.
she thereupon left her fathers house and resided with her maternal grand father who protected and maintained her.
the plaintiff thereafter instituted the present suit o.s.
she left behind her husband kandayya and their duaghter kaliammal.
balakrishnan and s.prasad for the respondent.
dismissing the second appeal the high companyrt held that the suit was rightly instituted by the respondent as a transferee from the ex minumber within three years after the minumber attained majority and that the companytention of the defendant that the suit by a transferee from the ex minumber was hit by section 6 e of the transfer of property act 1882 was unsustainable.
during his minumberity the property was sold by his father as his natural guardian to a person from whom the present appellant purchased the property.
on 25.4.1966 jainulavudeen in turn sold the property to the defendant appellant.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number951 of 1977.
from the judgment and order dated 29.7.1976 of the madras high companyrt in s.a.
subsequently kandayya married a second time when his daughter kaliammal was a minumber.
subsequently on 26.5.1966 the plaintiff obtained a deed of sale of the suit property in his favour from kaliammal who had by then attained majority.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by thommen j. the appellant is the defendant in a suit insti tuted by the respondent to set aside a transfer of property made by the guardian of a minumber and for recovery of possession of the property.
number89 of 1972.
sampath and p.n.ramalingam for the appellant.
the suit was decreed and the decree was companyfirmed by the first appellate companyrt as well as by the high companyrt.
veerammal died shortly after she purchased the property in 1948.
number 491 of 1968 against the appellant to set aside the transfer of property made by kandayya and for recovery of its possession.
she had a daughter by name kaliammal.
