VIMALA KUMARI Vs. RAVICHANDRAN @ CHANDIRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal has been brought by the plaintiff, who has filed a suit seeking a prayer ----

(2.) This Court, at the time of entertaining the second appeal, has framed the following substantial questions of law; -

(3.) It is seen from the plaint that the suit properties are originally belonged to one Venkataramaiya, who is the father of the plaintiff and the defendants 1 and 2. The defendants 1 and 2 were born to the first wife of Venkataramaiya and the plaintiff was born to the second wife of Venkataramaiya. Since the Venkataramaiya and the defendants treated, possessed and enjoyed the suit properties as joint family properties, it was pleaded that, the defendants and Venkataramaiya are entitled to 1/3rd share each. Before the death of Venkataramaiya, there was some ill-feelings between Venkataramaiya and defendants. As a result of distrained relationship, the said Venkataramaiya was looked after by his daughter, namely, the plaintiff. Therefore, out of love and affection, the Venkataramaiya, before his death, had executed a registered Will, dated 22.03.1980, in favour of the plaintiff with regard to his 1/3rd share in the suit property. While executing the said Will, Ex. A1, dated 22.03.1980, Venkataramaiya was in sound mind and good health. Resultantly, after his death on 20.09.1980, the Will dated 22.03.1980, has come into force, and therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/3rd share in the suit properties. After the death of the father, the plaintiff and the defendants are in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties --- 'A' and 'B' scheduled properties --- and as there was no partition between the plaintiff and the defendants, the first defendant, being elder brother, became managing Kartha and was managing the properties. This is also proved on the basis of joint patta issued in the year 1985 under the UDR scheme to the plaintiff and the defendants under patta No. 1315. Even after the death of their father in the year 1980, the plaintiff and the defendants acquired 'B' schedule property from out of the income derived from the joint family property, which is mentioned in 'A' schedule. From the year 1982 onwards, as the plaintiff and the defendants are in continuous, uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the same, they are entitled to have equal share of the suit properties.