thereafter tulasamma put the decree in i.l.r.
135 of 1973 and 126 of 1972.
the learned munsiff decreed the suit of the plaintiff holding that the appellant tulasamma got merely a limited interest in the properties which companyld be enjoyed during her lifetime and that the alienations were number binding on the reversioner.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 22 11 1967 of the andhra pradesh high companyrt in second appeal number 804/64 .
the 1956 act or the act of 1956.
667a.i.r.
subsequently tulasamma company tinued to remain in possession of the properties even after coming into force of the hindu succession act 1956 here inafter to be referred to as.
an appeal filed by the respondent to the district judgenellore was also dismissed.
i.l.r.
1968 1 mad.
1964 pub.
this application was set ex parte on january 13 1945 bug subsequently the petition.was registered as a suit and an ex parte decree was passed against the respondent on june 29 1946.
a.i.r.
1972 mys.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1360 of 1968.
similar points were involved in the other two appeals number.
1967 1 mad.
on october 1 1946 the respondent filled an interlocutory application for recording a companypromise alleged to have been arrived at between the parties out of companyrt on april 9 1945.
a.i.r.
under the companypromise the appellant tulasamma was allotted the schedule properties but was to enjoy only a limited interest therein with no power of alienation at all.
according to the terms of the compromise the properties were to revert to the plaintiff after the death of tulasamma.
pillai and r. vasudev pillai for the appellants.
v. s. narasimhachari for the respondents.
bhagwati and a.c.
the appellant tulasamma opposed this application which was ultimately dismissed on october 16 1946.
the judgment of p.n.
1969 j k 92.
1967 mad.429 a.i.r.
1968 a.p.
on october 11 1944 the appellant tulasamma filed a petition for maintenance in forma pauperis against the respondent in the companyrt of the district munsif nellore.
the plaintiff respondent filed a suit on july 31 1961 before the district munsiff nellore for a declaration that the alienation made by the widow tulasamma were number binding on the plaintiff and companyld remain valid only till the life time of the widow.
1965 a.p.
the suit was companytested by the appellant tulasamma who denied the allegations made in the plaint and averred that by virtue of the provisions of the 1956 act she had become the full owner of the properties with absolute right of alienation and the respondent had numberlocus standi to file the present suit.
66 a.i.r.
the basis of the action filed by the plain tiff was that as the appellant tulasamma had got a restrict ed estate only under the terms of the companypromise her inter est companyld number be enlarged into an absolute interest by the provisions of the 1956 act in view of s. 14 2 of the said act.
a.i.r.
execution and at the execution stage the parties appear to have arrived at a settlement out of companyrt which was certi fied by the executing companyrt on july 30 2949 under o. xxi r. 2 of the companye of civil procedure.
was delivered by bhagwati j.s.
by two registered deeds dated april 12 1960 and may 26 1961 the appellant leased out some of the proper ties to defendants 2 3 by the first deed and sold some of the properties to defendant 4 by the second deed.
s. krishnamurthi lyer r.k.
gupta jj.
