In 1967 a suit for partition was filed by sucessors, of other member of the Tarwad, in whose favour equity of redemption, of the land in suit, was transferred in a family partition in 1962.
366 H 367 A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
On 12th May, 1980, he was given the second offer for the post of Head Clerk at Air Force Station branch, Tambaram which was in Madras city.
Since there was numberdispute on basic facts, namely, redemption of mortgage by two junior members and their companytinuance in possession for more than fifty years on the date Section 4 1 a was added to the Land Reforms Act the rights of parties were decided, more, as a matter of law.
The suit was resisted amongst others on acquisition of right of tenant under Section 4 1 a of the Land Reforms Act.
From the Judgments dated 4.3.1992 and 8.4.1992 in Madras High Court in W.P. No.
349 of 1992.
Ramaswamy Attorney General, K. Sankaran, A. Rangananthan and A.V. Rangam for the Appellants.
Both the Respondents moved the High Court by way of Writ Petitions and the High Court took the view that the final offer made was number in the same office and so they were entitled to be posted as Head Clerks in the same office.
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.7.1980 of the Kerala High Court in Second Appeal No.
Being aggrieved by the said two decisions of the High Court, the appellant Bank preferred the present appeals.
He was then entitled to be companysidered for posting as Head Clerk only in his office which meant in any of the six parts of the local Head Office, that being the third and the final offer that companyld be made to him.
He declined the said offer too.
The appellant Bank issued Staff Circular No.
The first offer of the post of Head Clerk was made to him on 6th August, 1973 at Mudukulathur branch which is in Madras city.
4800 of 1992 In this case also, the respondent Sampath was working as a Clerk in Madras Regional Office.
4799 of 1992.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
However, he declined the third and the final offer also, and issued a lawyers numberice to the Bank companytending that the Overseas branch was different from the Regional office where he was working and, therefore, the offer given to him was companytrary to the said clause 1 d .
On 1st July, 1980, he was offered the post of Head Clerk in the Sowkarpet branch office in the same city which was less than 2 kms, from his Regional office where he was working.
246/92 and W.A. No.
The High Court took the view that the third offer made was number for the post of the Head Clerk in the same office where the respondent was working and, therefore, his refusal to accept the post did number exhaust the third option and he was entitled to the vacancy created by Nizamuddins death in the Regional office where the respondent was working.
The third offer was made to him for the post of Head Clerk at the Overseas branch, and that being part of the same local Head Office, he was bound to accept it.
This was declined by him.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. SAHAI, J. Whether a junior member of the Tarwad, in Kerala, who redeems the mortgage and is in possession for more than 50 years is a mortgagee holding the land companyprised in a mortgage so as to acquire rights of tenant of tenant under Section 4 A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, is the legal issue that arises for companysideration in this appeal, by successors of other members of the Tarwad who suit for partition was dismissed in second appeal by the High Court.
On 24th September, 1983, the respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court for quashing the third and the final offer made to him on 4th August 1983, and for a direction for posting him in the Regional office where the vacancy had occurred.
This offer was declined by him.
On 21st August, 1973, he was offered the post of Head Clerk at Deva Kottain which is outside Madras city.
Leave granted.
In the year 1045 1870 a mortgage was executed by the Karnavan akin to Manager of the Tarwad, somewhat like a joint family .
8244 of 1983.
Civil Appeal No.
On 6th September, 1983, one A. Nizamuddin who was working as Head Clerk in the Regional office passed away and that post became vacant.
Civil Appeal No.
The allegations made in the numberice were of companyrse denied by the bank.
M.S. Anam of the Appellants Sudhakaran for the Respondents.
K. Ramamurthi, M.A. Krishnmoorthy, M.A. Chinnaswamy, Subramaniam and Ms. C. Ramamurthi for the Respondents.
171 of 1976.
Two junior members, of the Tarwad, paid the amount in the year 1061 1886 , got the property released, obtained possession and they or their descendants companytinued in possession as such.
