P.HARI PRASAD Vs. G.DURAISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff in a suit for partition is the appellant before this Court. The facts in brief necessary for disposing of the above appeal is herein below narrated. Parties are referred to in the same ranking as before the Trial Court.

(2.) The plaintiff had filed the suit O.S.No.331 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur seeking a partition and separate possession of his 1/3rd share in the suit schedule property. It is the case of the plaintiff that the 2nd defendant and he are siblings, and their father late is Perumalsamy. The 1st defendant is the younger brother of the Perumalsamy. The plaintiff would contend that this suit property have been allotted to the share of their father under a partition deed dtd. 14/3/1972, entered between his family members and the suit schedule has been described as the D-Schedule thereunder. On and from the date of the partition the plaintiff has been exclusively in possession and enjoyment of the same.

(3.) It is a further case that the 2nd defendant was born on 18/4/1980 and he was born on 14/11/1984 and by reason of the Hindu Successions Act he and the 2nd defendant had therefore become coparceners in respect of the suit property alongwith their father each being entitled to a 1/3rd share. The plaintiff's father passed away on 9/2/2009 and on the demise of their father they had enquired with their uncle, the 1st defendant as to what were the properties that belonged to their father. However, the 1st defendant had given evasive replies constraining the plaintiff to apply for an encumbrance certificate in respect of the suit property. It is only then that the plaintiff came to know that his father has alienated the suit property in favour of the 1st defendant under a registered sale deed dtd. 25/3/1985.