M CHANDRALEKHA Vs. SUBRAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S.No.515 of 1988 on the file of District Munsif, Sangagiri, who lost in both the Courts below is the appellant herein.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff is as follows: THE first defendant Perianna Gounder (who died pending suit) has three sons - Late Natesa Muthu alias Perianna Gounder, Subramani and Kandasamy. THE third defendant is the wife of Natesa Muthu, while the 4th defendant is their daughter. Plaintiff is the wife of Kandasamy. According to the plaintiff, there was a partition in the family in the year 1968 between the father and sons. In that, Perianna Gounder was allotted "A" schedule, while his three sons were allotted "B" schedule property. Subramani and Kandasamy in the year 1980 purchased "C" schedule property. THEreafter, in the year 1983, Perianna Gounder settled the "A" schedule property in favour of Subramani and Kandasamy. "D" schedule property, which is also an agricultural land was purchased again by these two brothers viz., Subramani and Kandasamy. THE simple and straight case of the plaintiff is that after the demise of her husband in the year 1984, she is entitled for the properties of Kandasamy (her husband). Or in other words, she is entitled for half share in "A, C and D" schedule properties and 1/3rd share in "B" schedule properties. With the above pleadings, the plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.515 of 1988 on the file of District Munsif Court, Sangagiri for partition and possession and mesne profits as detailed in the plaint.

(3.) LET this Court first proceed to consider as to whether there is necessary pleading in this regard. In paragraph V of the plaint, the appellant/ plaintiff has pleaded as under: