THIRUMATHI AISWARYAM Vs. THIRUMATHI K SAROJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant. THE plaintiff claimed 1/5th share in the suit schedule "A" to "E" and the entire "F" schedule property. But subsequently, the properties described in "C" and "D", were deleted by order of this Court in C.R.P. No.3905 of 1983. THE contest here is only with regard to the immovable properties described in "A" and "B" schedules.

(2.) THE appellant is the daughter of the first respondent and the respondents 2 to 4 are the sister and brothers of the appellant. According to the appellant, her father Kodandaraman Pillai died intestate in 1966 at Madras, leaving behind the parties herein as his legal representatives and some properties. He did a lorry transport business and was earning a lot of money and an Insurance Policy for Rs.20,000 was taken by him, wherein the appellant and the second respondent were the nominees.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand would submit that the plaintiff seeking partition should first show what are the properties that form the estate of the deceased and referring them as "some property" will not really establish the plaintiff's case. THE mother had independent funds of her own and therefore there is no presumption that the suit properties were only purchased from the policy amount.