GURUVAPANDARAM DIED Vs. SITHUSWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is directed against the decree and judgment in A S No 15 of 1987 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Erode, reversing the decree and judgment of the District Munsif, Bhavani, in O S No 157 of 1986

(2.) . The facts are these "(a) Sithuswamy, the respondent herein is the younger brother's son of Guruva Pandaram, the appellant herein He filed a suit against Guruva Pandaram in O S No 47 of 1986 for declaration of his half share in the suit property and for permanent injunction on the basis that the suit property, an extent of 2 acres of punja land is a joint family property. Guruva Pandaram, the appellant herein also filed a suit in O.S. No. 157 of 1986 for declaration of his title to the suit property and for injunction against Sithuswamy. (b) Both the suit were tried together. The suit filed by Sithuswamy in O S. No. 47 of 1986 was dismissed and the suit filed by Guruva Pandaram in O.S. No. 157 of 1986 was decreed by a common judgment dated 24.11.1986 by the District Munsif, Bhavani. (c) Sithuswamy filed ttwo appeals against the judgment in the above two suits. The Principal Subordinate Judge, Erode in A.S. No. 14 of 1987 and A.S. No. 15 of 1987 by the common judgment dated 26.8.1987 set-aside the judgment of the trial Court and decreed the suit in O.S. No. 47 of 1986 filed by Sithuswamy and dismissed the suit in O.S. No. 157 of 1986 filed by Guruva Pandaram. Aggrieved by this, Guruva Pandaram filed S.A.No. 1648 of 1987 as against A.S. No. 14 of 1987 andS.A. No. 25 of 1988 as against A.S. No. 15 of 1987 before this Court."

(3.) S.A. No. 25 of 1988 was numbered on 8.1.1988. This Court admitted the second appeal on 14.1.1988 on the following substantial questions of law : (1) Whether without ancestral property or nucleus the property purchased by brother's family partakes the character of H.U.F. property? (2) Can there be any inference of Hindu Undivided joint family when the suit property was purchased in the joint names in Ex.A-1 and divided among themselves in a registered partition deed under Ex B-2 ? (3) Whether the appellate court is right in presuming the existence of a Hindu undivided family on the basis of Exs. A-2 and A-3 in the face of Ex.B-2 ? (4) Whether the plaintiff is a member of a joint family (5) Whether the suit without impleading the father of the plaintiff is not bad for non-joinder of necessary party? (6) Whether the suit for declaration and injunction lies without setting aside the sale deed under Ex B-3 ?