PERIYAKKAL Vs. JOTHI PONNARASU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court namely Sub Court, Manapparai dtd. 10/1/2022. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit O.S.No.18 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Manapparai. The respondents are the defendants in the said suit. The suit was filed for partition claiming 1/4th share in the suit schedule property. The appellant claims that she is the daughter born through the first wife of her father Pethan. The respondents 2 , 3 and 4 are the children born through the second wife of Pethan. The first respondent is the son of the second respondent/first defendant. In the forthcoming paragraphs, the parties are described as per their litigative status in the suit.

(2.) In the suit, the first defendant alone has filed his written statement. The second defendant, who is the son of the first defendant, adopted the written statement of the first defendant. The defendants 3 and 4, who are the sisters of the first defendant, remained ex parte before the Trial Court. But, however, before the Lower Appellate Court, they entered appearance and sailed along with Ponnusamy, the first defendant in the suit. The first defendant in the suit, who had filed the written statement which is adopted by the second defendant, had pleaded that Pethan, his father, had executed a Will dtd. 12/6/1990 by which Jothi Ponnarasu his son, namely, the second defendant was the sole beneficiary in respect of the suit schedule property. It is also pleaded in the written statement of the first defendant that the plaintiff along with the third and fourth defendants, who are his sisters, have released their share in the suit schedule property by executing a release deed in his favour. The plaintiff has however denied that she had executed any release deed in favour of Ponnusamy, the first defendant and has also disputed the Will, which is alleged to have been executed in favour of the second defendant, the alleged beneficiary.

(3.) Based on the pleadings of the respective parties, issues were framed by the Trial Court, which are as follows: