V. NARASIMMA NAIDU Vs. THIRUMALAISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in these Second Appeal as well as Cross Objection is to theJudgment and decree dated 23.04.2009 passed in Appeal Suit No.36 of 2008 by the Additional District Court/Fast Track Court, Dindigul, wherein the Judgment and decree dated 15.07.2008 passed in Original Suit No.95 of 2005 by the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul are modified.

(2.) THE respondents in Second Appeal No.90 of 2010 and Cross Objectors in Cross Objection No.23 of 2010 as plaintiffs have instituted Original Suit No.95 of 2005 on the file of the trial Court for the reliefs of partition and separate possession of their half share in the suit properties wherein, the appellants have been arrayed as defendants.

(3.) IN the written statement filed on the side of the defendants it is averred that the relationship mentioned in the plaint is correct. But it is false to say that the suit items 2 and 3 are joint family properties. The first defendant has purchased vacant site of the suit second item by virtue of the sale deed dated 19.04.1983 by using his separate funds and he put up construction and therefore, the suit second item is his separate property. The suit third item is the absolute and separate property of Venkidasamy Naidu and he voluntarily executed the will dated 02.02.2005 in favour of the defendants 2 to 4. It is false to aver that the said will is nothing but concoction. In the suit third item, the said Venkidasamy Naidu has made some improvements. The first plaintiff and first defendant have not contributed anything towards improvements. There is no merit in the Suit and the same deserves to be dismissed.