Possession rights follow title where purchase contribution and clean-hands objections do not defeat the owner's claim.

Title to the flat stood in the plaintiff's name, so the defendants' claimed contribution toward the purchase price did not create any ownership interest or a right to remain in possession. A plea of lack of clean hands could not defeat a claim for possession once entitlement was shown, because such relief is not discretionary in that situation. The withdrawn disinheritance notice also gave no present possessory right, since any inheritance could arise only on the plaintiff's death. An attempt to amend the written statement after hearing was refused as immaterial. The suit was decreed for possession, with mesne profits following and liberty to seek inquiry if execution was resisted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a decree for possession of the flat and whether the defences based on alleged contribution to the purchase consideration, alleged lack of clean hands, and proposed family arrangement could defeat that claim.

Analysis: The title deed stood in the plaintiff's name, and the defendants' assertion that they had contributed towards the purchase price did not create any ownership right or a right to continue in possession. A plea that the plaintiff had not approached the Court with clean hands did not answer a claim for possession, since a decree for possession is not discretionary once entitlement is established. The withdrawn disinheritance notice also did not confer any present right to retain possession, and inheritance could arise only on the plaintiff's demise. The request to amend the written statement after the matter had been heard was declined, and the defence raised was held to be immaterial.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was entitled to possession, and the suit was decreed for possession against defendants no. 1 and 2. The claim for mesne profits followed the decree for possession, with liberty to seek inquiry if resistance to execution occurred.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere contribution towards the purchase price of immovable property does not confer ownership or a right to retain possession against the title holder, and a plea of lack of clean hands cannot defeat a non-discretionary claim for possession.

---