The relevant part of the gift deed is as follows I have companyveyed to you under this deed the properties mentioned hereunder and worth Rs.
Shanbagakannu immediately after her husbands death.
It was found that the deed of gift did number evidence family arrangement, and there was a positive recital therein that Duraiswami requested Parvathiammal to give him the properties in question as a matter of grace and she companyplied with his request and executed the deed ext.
The suit was for a declaration and possession of 1 7/8 share of the Archakam service in the temple and also to recover 1/8 share in the Inam village of Kelavikulam attached to the Archakam service in the third defendant temple.
It will be of assistance to set out the following pedigree table Vellasubba Bhattar Devendra Bhattar Mathu Bhattar Velayutba Sadasiva Bhattar adopted by Vellasubba Bhattar ll Chokku Chinnaswami and d. 1857 Ammani Ammal Subba Bhattar Meenammal d. 1925 left will dt.
This was particularly so with regard to the pooja rights which, according to the companytention of the plaintiff companyld have been gifted by Parvathiammal only to the plaintiff who was the immediate heir and number to Duraiswami who was a remoter heir.
Other reliefs were also claimed relating to the fourth defendant temple which, however, do number survive in the appeal.
As many as 19 issues were framed by the trial Court.
16 1 24 in favour of wife Kalyani daughter Alagia Meenal Parvathi d. 1946 2nd daughter Duraiswamy d. 1938 Parvathi d. 1946 Seetha Lakshmi adopted married Subba Bhattar Subba Bhattar alias in the next branch.
On November 20, 1929 Parvathiammal executed a deed of gift in favour of Duraiswamy who was described as her senior mothers son.
Subba Bhattar had bequeathed Ms share in the disputed properties and rights to his wife Parvathiammal.
It may be stated, however, that there was neither any pleading number was any issue framed on the question whether the gift deed which had been executed by Parvathiammal on November 20, 1929 was in effect and substance a document which had been executed for companysideration and that the properties and rights companyered by the gift deed had number been companyveyed by way of a gift and without any companysideration.
3,000/ together with pooja rights thereon and all my absolute rights pertaining thereto and whereas I have this day itself delivered possession of the same to you, you yourself shall discharge the debt upto the tune of about Rupees 10,000/ in respect of the same, you yourself shall hold and enjoy the said properties together with pooja rights in respect of the two temples at Tiruvedavur and Tiruvedagam for all times from son to grandson and so on in succession with powers of alienation by way of gift, exchange, sale etc.
The other defendants were Thiruvathavoor Thirumarainatha swami Temple Devasthanam through its Executive Officer residing at Thiruvathavoor village, Melur Taluk and Thiruvedagam Devasthanam through its trustees, residing at Thiruvedagam Nilakottai Taluk.
N. Grover, J. This is an appeal by special leave and arises out of a suit filed by Muthu Bhattar against Seetha lakshmiammal and her son Subba Bhattar alias Shanbagakannu who was a minor at the time of the institution of the suit.
absolutely as you please.
