Muthukrishnan Chetty vs Annapurnathachi and Another

The appeal relates to the validity of the sale of items Nos. 1 and 2. We agree with the Subordinate Judge that the alienation must be upheld. Mr. Aiya Iyer contends that the Judge''s observation that Srirangathammal took steps to enforce payment of her debts is not justified by the evidence. No doubt the first defendant''s evidence on the point is contradicted by the testimony of the plaintiff as his own witness, but no reason is shown why we should differ from the Subordinate Judge from accepting the defendant''s evidence. We may add that we cannot accept the contention, that actual demand by a creditor must be proved to justify a widow in selling her husband''s property to discharge his debt. In this case the interest on the principal amount of Rs. 400 had amounted to Rs. 300 and the widow acted prudently in taking steps to discharge the debt. We confirm the lower Court''s decision and dismiss the appeal with costs.