P.M.C. KUNHIRAMAN NAIR vs C.R. NAGANATHA IYER .

The Supreme Court held that the agreement between the respondents and the appellant regarding the management of property was valid, but the subsequent agreement with TM was deemed a sham transaction, conferring no rights to TM. The Court affirmed that the respondents retained their leasehold interest in the property despite the appellant's claims. The High Court's dismissal of the appellant's appeal was upheld, confirming that the respondents were entitled to possession of the property excluding the plant and machinery, as per the decree for possession.