SULOCHANA Vs. PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE arguments advanced by Mr.S.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned counsel for the respondent are heard.

(2.) THE plaintiff in the Original Suit in O.S.No.7 of 2008 on the file of the learned District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi is the petitioner herein. The defendant in the said suit is the respondent in the Civil Revision Petition. The revision petitioner filed the above said suit for a declaration that the suit property absolutely belongs to her, for recovery of possession of the same from the respondent herein/defendant and for mesne profits. The said prayer was made on the strength of her pleading that the property originally belonged to Late Ramaiah Naidu, the father of the revision petitioner and on the death of Ramaiah Naidu, the property devolved upon Veerammal, the mother of the revision petitioner and also the revision petitioner as the legally wedded wife and legitimate daughter respectively of Ramaiah Naidu and that one Rajamani Ammal, who was the second wife of Ramaiah Naidu, did not acquire the status of a legally wedded wife because her marriage with Ramaiah Naidu took place after the Tamil Nadu Act 6 of 1949 came into force. The revision petitioner/plaintiff has made her claim of absolute title to the suit property based on the alternative plea that even if Rajamani Ammal had got any right in the property either as a legal heir of Ramaiah Naidu or by virtue of any partition by way of family arrangement, since according to the petitioner, Rajamani Ammal died intestate, the property devolved upon the revision petitioner as the legal heir.

(3.) WHEN the trial was in progress, the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition/plaintiff chose to file an application in I.A.No.269 of 2011 for amending the plaint to include an alternative prayer for partition of the suit property directing division of the same into two equal shares and allotment of one such share to the petitioner/ plaintiff.