THIRUPURASUNDARI Vs. GOPALARAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the plaintiffs in the suit filed for partition, separate possession and permanent injunction restraining the 3rd defendant from alienating the 3rd item of the suit property.

(2.) The trial Court decreed the suit for partition in respect of the item Nos.1 and 2 and held that the plaintiffs are entitled for 1/4th share each. As far as the 3rd item is concerned, the relief sought against the 3rd defendant was dismissed. Against the disallowed portion of relief, the present appeal suit is filed.

(3.) The gist of the plaint is that the 1st defendant is the father of the plaintiffs 1 to 3. The 2nd defendant is the mother of the plaintiffs and the 3rd defendant is the sister of the 1st defendant. According to the plaintiffs, item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit property belongs to Kumarasamy Padayachi, who have five sons, Gopalaraman is one among them. During his life time of Kumarasamy Padayachi, partition took place between Kumarasamy Padayachi and his sons during the year 1970. Item Nos.1 and 2 was allotted to the 1st defendant Gopalaraman. Since then, the 1st defendant is in possession and enjoyment of the item Nos.1 and 2 of the suit property. Gopalaraman sold some of his properties at Marungur village and purchased the 3rd item property on 02.01.1976 in the name of his wife, the 2nd defendant. The sale consideration for purchasing the said property was from the joint family income and fund. Since the 3rd item property purchased from the joint family property fund, the same has to be treated as ancestral property and subjected to partition. The plaintiffs have come to know that the 2nd defendant had executed a sale deed in favour of the 3rd defendant due to coercion exerted on her and now the 3rd defendant tried to alienate the 3rd item property to third party. It is alleged in the plaint that the 3rd defendant, who is none other than the sister of the 1st defendant.