K.V. DAMODARAN Vs. K.V. SARADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for partition. There is no serious dispute regarding partition except with regard to one item of property. This item was found to be partible by the court below. The item now in question is item No. 1

(2.) Admittedly item No. 1 has been obtained under Ext. A1, a marupat by the father of the plaintiff and 1st defendant. The father was acting as guardian of the plaintiff and 1st defendant. It was contended that the plaintiff and 1st defendant are not the owners of this item and that the property continued to be the property of their father and that the said property is liable to be divided between all the legal heirs of the father Koran Vaidyar.

(3.) The Trial Court did not agree with this contention after an elaborate and deep study of all facts and circumstances revealed in the case. An appeal was filed by the defendants. The learned single Judge considered the question elaborately and found that all the legal representatives of Koran Vaidyar cannot claim right of partition in regard to item No. 1.