RAMAMURTHI; ARUMUGAM CHETTIAR Vs. AYINAR CHETTIAR; THANGAVEL CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs are the appellants herein. A suit was filed in O.S.No.209 of 1990 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Musuri by the appellants seeking declaration and possession and mesne profits in so far as 'A' Schedule Property is concerned and for partition and separate possession in so far as 'B' Schedule Property is concerned.

(2.) Undisputed facts involved in the present case are that the suit property originally belonged to one Subramaniam Chettiar. Subramaniam Chettiar had two sons, namely Ganapathy Chettiar and Arumugam Chettiar, who is the second appellant/second plaintiff. A registered partition deed was executed between Subramaniam Chettiar and his two sons. Apart from the partition deed, two settlement deeds have been executed by Subramaniam Chettiar. Ex.A.2 is the registered settlement deed dated 22.05.1970, executed by Subramaniam Chettiar pertaining to the suit properties. As per Ex.A.2, the second plaintiff was permitted to enjoy the 'A' Scheduled property till his life time and if he begets a son, the title should vest in the male child. It also states that in the event of second plaintiff not having any male issue, the property which is covered under 'A' Schedule would go to the defendants. Similarly, in so far as the 'B' Schedule property is concerned, the right to enjoy the same was given to the defendants and in the event of a male child being born to the second plaintiff, the properties will have to be divided equally between the said male child on the one hand and the defendants on the other hand.

(3.) A suit was filed by the second plaintiff in O.S.No.106 of 1971, seeking partition of the entire properties belonging to the family of Subramaniam Chettiar. In the said suit, it was contended by the second appellant, being the plaintiff therein that the settlement deed cannot be acted upon. The suit filed in O.S.No.106 of 1971 and the appeal filed in A.S.No.542 of 1977 ended against the second appellant. A specific plea has been taken by the defendants that the settlement deed, which has been marked as Ex.B.6 in the said suit corresponding to Ex.A.2 in the present suit has been acted upon and the settlees are in possession and enjoyment of the respective portions of the property including the suit properties.