ALAGAMMAL Vs. RAKKAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants I to 5 in 0. S. No. 32 of 1976, Sub Court, Sivaganga, are the appellants in this appeal. The respondent herein instituted that suit as an indigent person for a declaration that as heir' to her father Velu Ambalam, she is entitled to the suit properties and for recovery of possession of those properties from the appellants. The respondent claimed that she is the daughter of late Velu Ambalam and one Karupayee (P. W. 5) who were married and to whom the respondent was born on 3-11-1943, at Amaravathi Pudur, where all of them were living together till 1950. According to the case of the respondent, the first appellant, whose children are appellants 2 to 5, was the daughter of the sister of Velu Ambalam. and she was brought into the family to be of assistance but later Velu Ambalam developed intimacy with her as a result of which appellants 2 to 5 were born. There was no marriage between Velu Ambalam and the first appellant, according to the respondent. The further case of the respondent was that due to the instigation of the first appellant, she and her mother Karupayee (P. W. 5) the legally wedded wife of Velu Ambalam, were driven out of the house some time in 1950 and a few years thereafter Karupayee (P. W. 5) married one Subbiah Ambalam of Ariyakudi, who also later died. The respondent stated that she lived with her maternal grandmother for some time and on her death, the respondent had been living with her maternal aunt. On the death of Velu Ambalam on 27-3-1973, according to the respondent, she was his only legal heir and, therefore, she became entitled to all the properties which belonged to her father Velu Ambalam. The respondent also claimed that B Schedule Properties stood in the name of the first appellant, they were realy acquisitions benami in her name by Velu Ambalam. Claiming that she is the sole heir to her deceased father Velu Ambalam, the respondent laid the suit for a declaration that A and F Schedule properties in the plaint belong to her as heir to Velu Ambalam and also for recovery of vossession of the same from the appellants and for mesne profits.

(2.) On behalf of appellants 3 to 5, who were defendants 3 to 5 in the suit, the first appellant filed a written statement and this was adopted by the second appellant, who was the second defendani in the suit. The first appellant stated that Karupayee (P. W. 5) was not the legally wedded wife of the deceased Velu Ambalam and that the respondent was not his daughter. The driving' out of Karupayee (P. W. 5) and the respondent from the house by the first appellant was denied. The first appellant claimed that she is the legally wedded wife of Velu Ambalam and that the other appellants, namely, appellants 2 to 5. are the legitimate children born to her through Velu Ambalam out of such lawful wedlock. The details of the properties given in the plaint were stated to be not correct. As regards B Schedule properties, the first appellant claimed those properties to be her absolute properties, but that the rest of the properties belonged to Velu Ambalam. The appellants also set up a will dated 19-12-1965 stated to have been executed by Velu Ambalam under which he bequeathed all his Properties to the children of the first appellant appointing her and others as executors, and, therefore, they claimed that the respondent will not be entitled to any of the properties of Velu Ambalam either as his heir or even otherwise.

(3.) On the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, the learned Subordinate Judge framed the following issues and additional issues for trial-