CHINNASAMI Vs. DHANASEKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal is a textbook case as to how a litigant can manipulate and agitate a suit before a Court by clever drafting creating an illusion as if there is a cause of action for one of the property which falls within the jurisdiction of the Court and whereas the real dispute is with regard to another property which does not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court and which otherwise could not have been tried by the Court and will be hit by the principle of coram non judice.

(2.) The defendants are the appellants in this Second Appeal.

(3.) The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit on the ground that the 1st schedule of the suit properties are the self-acquired properties of the paternal grandfather of the plaintiff and the 2nd schedule properties are the ancestral properties of the paternal grandfather which fell to his share by virtue of a registered partition deed dtd. 24/11/1959. The further case of the plaintiff is that the paternal grandfather Raja Gounder executed a registered Will dtd. 17/8/1986 in favour of the plaintiff regarding the 1st schedule of properties. Similarly, he executed another Will dtd. 1/11/1990 in favour of the plaintiff regarding the 2nd schedule properties. The said Raja Gounder passed away on 29/3/1991 and the Wills executed by him came into force and thereby, the plaintiff became the absolute owner of the 1st and 2nd schedule properties.