Case Note & Summary
The present appeal arises from a suit for partition filed by the plaintiffs (respondents herein) against the defendants (appellants) before the Addl. Sub Court, Ernakulam, seeking division of properties belonging to Andipillil Tharwad under Marumakkathayam law. The dispute concerns two sets of properties: Item No.1, which was gifted to 11 members of the tharwad and later partitioned among five branches including Parukutty Amma and her children; and Item No.2, which devolved from Sankar Padmanabhan to his wife Parukutty Amma and their children, and later through a mortgage deed. The plaintiffs, being the husband and children of Padmavathi Amma (one of Parukutty Amma's granddaughters), claimed that the properties were tharwad properties and sought partition into 16 shares. The defendants contended that the properties were not tharwad properties and that prior partition deeds and alienations were binding. The Trial Court framed eleven issues and held that both items were thavazhi properties belonging to the thavazhi of Parukutty Amma, and that partition deeds and alienations by some members without the consent of all were void. A preliminary decree was passed allotting 1/15 share each to defendants 1-7 and plaintiffs 2-8, and one share to defendants 9-14 collectively. The High Court of Kerala affirmed this decree. The Supreme Court, after examining the principles of Marumakkathayam law, held that the properties were thavazhi properties, and that the partition deed and alienations were not binding on the plaintiffs. The appeal was dismissed, and the preliminary decree was upheld.
Headnote
A) Marumakkathayam Law - Tharwad and Thavazhi - Nature of Property - Under Marumakkathayam law, a tharwad is a joint family comprising female descendants, while a thavazhi is a branch consisting of a female and her descendants. Properties acquired by a female and her children constitute thavazhi property, not tharwad property. The court held that the plaint schedule items 1 and 2 were thavazhi properties belonging to the thavazhi of Parukutty Amma, and thus partition or alienation by some members without the consent of all is void. (Paras 2-5, 10-12) B) Marumakkathayam Law - Alienation of Thavazhi Property - Void - The undivided interest of a member of a thavazhi cannot be alienated. Relying on Ammalu Amma v. Lakshmi Amma (1966 KLT 32), the court held that alienations made by Neelakanta Menon and others were void as they were not binding on other members of the thavazhi. (Paras 11-12) C) Marumakkathayam Law - Partition Deed - Binding Effect - A partition deed executed by only some members of a thavazhi without the consent of all is not binding on the other members. The court affirmed the trial court's finding that the partition deed no.6143/1981 was not binding on the plaintiffs. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the properties in dispute are tharwad or thavazhi properties under Marumakkathayam law, and whether a partition deed executed by some members without the consent of all is binding on the other members.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court of Kerala.
Law Points
- Marumakkathayam law
- tharwad
- thavazhi
- karanavan
- matrilineal succession
- joint family property
- partition
- alienation void
- Madras Marumakkattayam Act
- 1932
