Judgment :- The appeal was posted before us today for being spoken to as it was felt by one of us, Ramakrishnan, J., (hat there is an inadvertent mistake in paragraph 50 of the majority judgment in the appeal where the conclusions reached have been summarised. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find that there is a mistake in conclusion No. 3 formulated in para. 50 of the majority judgement.-The detailed discussion contained in the body of the judgment would clearly show that conclusion No.3 should be as indicated below and not as slated at present in the judgment. 3. We approve the discussion of the learned single judge in Saraswathy Amma v. Radhamma (1990(2) KLT 183) and over-rule the observations in Madhavi Amma v. Kalliani Amma (1988(2) KLT 964) and Bhaskaran v. Kalliani (1990(2) KLT 749) to the extent they are contrary to what has been laid down in this judgment". Accordingly, the conclusion numbered as 3 in paragraph 50 of the majority judgement will stand review and substituted by the following sentence. "'We approve the decision of the learned single judge in Saraswathy Arnma v. Radliamnia (1990(2) KLT 183) and over-rule the observations in Madhavi Amma v. Kalliani Amma (1988(2) KLT 964) and Bhaskaran v. Kalliani (1990(2) KLT 749) to the extent they are contrary to what has been laid down in this judgment."