KRISHNAVENI AMMAL Vs. POONGAVANA AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two second appeals are focussed by the original plaintiff, animadverting upon the common judgement and decrees dated 29.7.2010 passed in A.S. Nos. 80 and 84 of 2005 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gingee, reversing the judgment and decrees of the learned Additional District Munsif, Gingee in O.S. Nos. 568 of 1993 and 148 of 1995. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

(2.) A recapitulation and re'sume' of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of these two Second Appeals would run thus: (a) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 568 of 1993 filed the suit seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides, I have been of the considered view that the following substantial questions of law have to be framed in respect of S.A. No. 331 of 2011 (O.S. No. 568 of 1993): (1) Whether the first appellate. Court was justified in vaguely placing reliance on G.O. Ms. No. 690 and deciding the lis, without taking into account Rule 49 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978? (2) Whether the first appellate Court was justified in ignoring the respective rights of Krishnaveni Ammal, the plaintiff and her children and also the children born to Poongavana Ammal through Dhamodhara Gounder? (3) Whether there is any perversity or illegality in the common judgment and decrees passed by the first appellate Court?