ROHAYYA BEEVI Vs. C VARADARAJULU NAIDU DIED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2 are the appellants herein. The first respondent, who during the pendency of the appeal, filed the suit for partition and separate possession 19/24 shares. He claimed to have purchased under a sale deed dated 22.9.1975 the belonging to Mohammed Ismail, Mohammed Yusuff, Mohammed Ibrahim, Ibramsa and Wahab. Mohammed Yusuff is the son of Kasim Rowther, who, according to the plaintiff, half share in the property. The other half share was belonging to Yacoob Rowther, brother of Kasim Rowther., and on Yacoob's death, the devolved on his wife and According to the plaintiff, except the defendants, the other heirs of Yacoob Rowther the sale deed dated 22.9.1975, which was executed by Kasim Rowther's son Mohammed Yusuff.

(2.) THE defendants, who are Yacoob Rowther's wife, daughters and son, resisted mainly on the ground that the property belonged to the defendants exclusively as kudiyiruppu. According to the defendants, the other heirs of Yacoob Rowther and the Kasim Rowther, did not have any right in the Kudiyiruppu as they were not in possession. is not necessary to set out elaborately the defence raised by the defendants in the statements.

(3.) THE trial Court upheld the said plea and dismissed the suit. THE finding on the issue was that defendants 1 to 3 in that suit were agriculturists or agricultural labourers their principal means of livelihood was agriculture and they were entitled to the benefits Tamil Nadu Act XXXVIII of 1961. THEre was an appeal in the Sub Court, Mayuram, ended in dismissal. THE plaintiff preferred S.A.No.1539 of 1971 in this Court, which dismissed on 19.3.1974. THE judgments in the prior proceedings are marked as Exts.A 4 and A-3 respectively.