DORASWAMY Vs. SIVASANKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Preliminary judgment and decree in a suit for partition passed by the learned Sub Judge, Palakkad, is challenged in this appeal. Second defendant is the appellant.

(2.) Sixteen items of immovable properties were included in the plaint, initially, for partition as belonging to the joint family of plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 seeking division and allotment of 1/4th share to plaintiff. Thirunavakarasu Udayar (for short Udayar), father of plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 and husband of first defendant, Kartha of the joint family, had passed away. After his death, plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3, his sons, and first defendant, his widow, are entitled to 1/4th share in the plaint properties, was the case of plaintiff. Later, plaint was amended to state that some items included in the plaint schedule were covered by a previous partition (Ext. A1) entered by Udayar and two of his sons (defendants 2 and 3), and, one more item of properly was added as available for partition to sharers. Plaintiff was not a party to that deed. Items 3, 6 and 9 to 13 and 17 in the plaint are properties allotted in Ext. A1 partition deed as 'A' schedule to the father, Udayar, and after his death, his widow and sons, all of them, have got equal share in those items, was the case in the amended plaint. Defendants 1 to 3, all of them, resisted the claim for partition over the items covered by 'A' schedule in Ext. A1 deed allotted to Udayar contending that he had executed Ext. B3 will over those items in favour of three persons, widow of Sankaly Udayar(predeceased son of Udayar), second defendant's son and third defendant as A to C schedule respectively reserving life interest of his widow, first defendant in all the above properties.

(3.) Widow of Sankali Udayar and also daughter of a predeceased daughter of Thirunavakarasu Udayar got impleaded in the suit as additional 4th and 5th defendants respectively. Son of second defendant also got impleaded as additional sixth defendant.