2016 INSC 0132
                                    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                     Chamayath Cheriyannal & Anr.

                                                      Vs.

                             Chamayath Cheriyannal Hajirommabi & Ors.

                                           C.A.No.4925 of 2006

                              (Anil R.Dave and Adarsh Kumar Goel,JJ.,)

                                                 04.02.2016

                                                JUDGMENT

Anil R.Dave, J.,

1. Heard the learned counsel.

2. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment as well as the judgment delivered by the Trial
Court, we are of the view that the findings arrived at by the Trial Court with regard to the p-
artition among the members of the Tarwad were correct and in our opinion the High Court
ought not to have interfered with the said findings.

3. Once there was a partition among the members of the Tarwad, and when there are two
different thavazhy, namely Attakoya thavazhy and Syed Koya thavazhy, and when some
share of one thavazhy had been gifted, the same could not have been objected to by a
member of another thavazhy.

4. For the aforesaid reason, we agree with the findings arrived at by the Trial Court. We set
aside the impugned judgment delivered by the High Court and restore the order and decree
passed by the Trial Court.

5. In view of the above, the civil appeal is disposed of as allowed. No order as to costs.

1  SpotLaw