THIMMA NAICKER Vs. MANIMEKALAI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up for hearing through Video-Conferencing. The fourth defendant in OS No.103 of 2016 challenges an order made in IA No.661 of 2017 by which his application for filing an additional written statement was dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground that the fourth defendant is seeking to withdraw certain admissions made in the original written statement.

(2.) The suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking partition contending that her father had settled his 1/4th share in the suit properties in her favour under a registered Settlement Deed dated 12.07.2016. On the strength of the said settlement deed, the plaintiff sought for partition and separate possession of her 1/4th share.

(3.) The suit is being resisted by the fourth defendant. The fourth defendant filed a written statement on 08.11.2016 admitting the fact that the suit property were partitioned between the heirs of one Thimmanaicker and the heirs of Mallanaicker on 25.04.2006 and under the said partition, the suit property was allotted to Palanisamy, Ponnusamy, Thimma Naicker and Thangamuthu, sons of Mallanaicker. It is also claimed that from the date of the said partition, the sons of Mallanaicker have been in joint possession and enjoyment of the property.