R SUBRAMANIAN Vs. L SARADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 11 and 13 in O.S.No.212 of 1990 on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore are the appellants in A.S.No.747 of 1995 and the second defendant in O.S.No.212 of 1990 on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore is the appellant in A.S.No.180 of 1996.

(2.) The said suit was filed by one Saradha, the first respondent herein against defendants 1 to 13 who are her brothers and sisters. The suit was filed for partition of her 1/14 share and for recovery of possession and for mesne profits. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 13 are brothers and sisters and they are the children of V.N.Radhakrishna Reddiar and Kamalammal and the properties mentioned in 'A' schedule belonged to Kamalammal having been purchased by her under two sale deeds dated 20.11.1953 and 4.4.1962 and the properties mentioned in B schedule belonged to the father V.N.Radhakrishna Reddiar. Radhakrishna Reddiar died in 1974 and Kamalammal died in 1982 and both died intestate. Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendants are each entitled to 1/14 share in the suit properties. As the defendants did not give the plaintiff's share, the suit was filed for partition.

(3.) The 11th defendant filed statement and the same was adopted by defendants 3, 4 and 13. According to the 11th defendant, the suit properties are not partiable and the suit is also bad for non joinder of necessary parties and bad for partition partition. The mother Kamalammal settled door No.13, Venugopalapuram Main Road to the plaintiff on 27.8.1975 and that property was not included in the suit. Similarly, door No.12 at Venugopalapuram Main Road belonged to the father and the third defendant executed settlement in respect of the property in favour of the ninth defendant and the ninth defendant sold the property to one Malathy under a registered sale deed dated 19.2.1983 and Malathy was a proper and necessary party. Door No.13F also belonged to the father and the second defendant executed a settlement deed in favour of the 8th defendant on 21.1.1980 and that was sold to one Govindarajan by the 8th defendant on 13.7.1983 and the said Govindarajan was also a proper and necessary party. Similarly, the properties of the mother viz., No.1, South Kavara Street and Manjapakkam were also conveyed to one Padmavathi Ammal by defendants 8 and 10 and Padmavathi Ammal was not impleaded and the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 13 gave power to the 12th defendant for selling certain properties and the power agent viz., the 12th defendant sold the some properties to one Kalavathi and those properties were also not included and Kalavathi was also not impleaded and therefore, the suit was bad for partition partition and bad for non joinder of necessary and proper parties.