Abirami vs Mathinan And Anr. on 12 December, 1983
This recital clearly indicates that Chellammal had a pre-existing right and the right to A schedule properties did not originate by the execution of the document, Ex.B-19. Since there is a clear recital indicating a pre-existing right in favour of Chellammal under Ex.B-19, the principle laid down in Soundararajan v. Venkataraman (1976)2 M.L.J. 466 : 89 L.W. 647, dealing with documents which do not mention any pre-existing right, cannot be applied to the facts of this case. The conclusion arrived at by both the courts below that Section 14(1) of the Act is applicable to the property got by Chellammal under Ex.B-19 is correct and there are no grounds for interfering with the concurrent findings of both the Courts below in this regard.