ALAGAMMAI Vs. V RAKKAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 1 to 5 in O. S. No. 32 of 1976, on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Sivaganga, are the appellants in this Letters Patent Appeal. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration of heirship and recovery of possession on the strength of title. The plaintiff based her claim as follows : The plaintiff is the daughter of Velu Ambalam and Karuppayee, who were law-fully wedded as husband and wife. The plaintiff was born out of such wedlock on 3-11-1943. The first defendant was a sister's daughter of Velu Ambalam and she was brought into the family for domestic assistance. Velu Ambalam developed sexual contact with the first defendant due to proximity. The first-defendant was not the lawfully wedded wife of Velu Ambalam. Defendants 2 to 5 were born to the first-defendant out of her illegal intimacy with Velu Ambalaml'.' The plaintiff and her another Karuppayee were driven out of the household at the instance of the first-defendant in or about 1950. The plaintiff's mother Karuppayee later married one Subbiah Ambalam of Ariyakudi, who also died. The plaintiff was living in the household of her maternal grand mother and on her demised she has been living with her maternal aunt. Velu Ambalam died on 27-3-1973 leaving the plaintiff as his only legal heir. All the properties set out in the plaint schedules belonged to late Velu Ambalam. Though the properties set out in B Schedule stand in the name of the first-defendant, they were acquired only by Velu Ambalam benami, in the name of the first-defendant.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit saying as follows : Karuppayee was not the lawfully wedded wife of Velu Ambalam. The plaintiff was not the daughter of Velu Ambalam. The first defendant was the lawfully wedded wife of Velu Ambalam and defendants 2 to 5 are the legitimate children of Velu Ambalam through the first-defendant. B schedule properties are the absolute properties of the first defendant. Under the Will dated 19-12-1965, executed by Velu Ambalam at Muar in Malaya, Velu Ambalam bequeathed all his properties to the children of the first-defendant appointing her and others as executors. The plaintiff is not the legal heir of Velu Ambalam and she is not entitled to get any relief.

(3.) Reflecting the controversy that arose on the pleadings, the Court below formulated the following issues: