year 1998. In reply to the lawyers
notice, the defendants pleaded oral assignment of the property
in the year 1950 for a consideration ... appreciation of the oral and
documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the
defendants have proved the oral assignment of the property and
that
partition and item No.5 allotted
to Pokki was orally assigned in favour of Chathu by
Pokki in 1950 and the said property has been ... possession
of the property and appellants did not establish
the alleged oral assignment or possession.
Appellants challenged the judgment before
Additional District Court, Vadakara
partition and item No.5 allotted
to Pokki was orally assigned in favour of Chathu by
Pokki in 1950 and the said property has been ... possession
of the property and appellants did not establish
the alleged oral assignment or possession.
Appellants challenged the judgment before
Additional District Court, Vadakara
succeeded in establishing his legal title as it is based
on oral assignment, there is evidence regarding his possessory title
in the property and that
Tarwad was taken on oral lease by one
Narayana Poduval long prior to 1945. The property was then
orally assigned to Kunhikanna Poduval. Kunhikanna ... there. The case set
up is that Narayana Poduval, who obtained oral lease,
assigned the leasehold right to Kunhikanna Poduval.
Kunhikanna Poduval
third and fourth defendants respectively. Those
defendants were enjoying the properties assigned
under oral lease given by Janaky Amma and
recognising their possession as lessees ... Exts.
B3 and B4 assignment deeds previous possession over
the land assigned with the assignees was traced to
oral leases made in their favour will
defendant claimed that his father obtained oral lease
of the scheduled property in the year 1976. He also assigned property in favour of
third parties ... present case, the defendant was the admitted tenant. His
oral assignment or oral lease in 1976 to Veerankutty Mulla even if it is true
defendant claimed that his father obtained oral lease
of the scheduled property in the year 1976. He also assigned property in favour of
third parties ... present case, the defendant was the admitted tenant. His
oral assignment or oral lease in 1976 to Veerankutty Mulla even if it is true
suit property at all. They only claim possession
in pursuance to an oral agreement for sale.
17. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants seems ... case of defendants
claiming possession on the basis of oral assignment deed but one
based on oral agreement for sale and also on the basis
rightly found by first appellate court there cannot be an oral
assignment of the property. Moreover, even in the written
statement, appellants have not disclosed
