Smt. Seetha And Ors. vs Kayiyath Krishnan And Ors. on 25 November, 1974
Before the Full Bench decision in Seetha's case 1975 KLT 156 (F.B.), another Full Bench in Janamma Pillai v. State 1974 KLT 750 (FB), has also taken the view that the property gifted by a person to his wife and children, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, is to be treated as thavazhi property of the donees. Therefore, the mere absence of.the word "thavazhi" in the Will excuted by Pokkinan by itself will not show that the properties were to be enjoyed as co-ownership property. It is also to be noted that in 1954 a registered partition deed was entered into as evidenced by Ext. A2 wherein the plaintiff and her children obtained plaint B-schedule property as thavazhi property and the same is not in dispute. Therefore, the existence of a thavazhi consisting of the plaintiff and her children as early as in 1954 would itself show that when Pokkinan intended his daughter and all her children to be benefited by the Will, the intention was to benefit the thavazhi of Devaki and not the persons mentioned in the Will only.