J. THIRUVENGADAM Vs. KALAIMAGAL SABHA BY ITS PRESIDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal Suit is filed against the judgment and decree, dtd. 23/3/2011 by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Cuddalore in O.S.No.141 of 2008, in and by which, the suit filed by the plaintiffs for partition and separate possession of 1/3rd share in the suit 'B' schedule properties and for consequential reliefs, was dismissed by the Trial Court.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs is that the suit properties belong to one Adimoolam. Ellammal was the wife of Adimoolam and the couple had three sons by name Jayaraman, Krishnasami and Rajaraman. As on the date of filing of the suit, the aforesaid Adimoolam, Ellammal and Jayaraman had died. The sons of Jayaraman namely, Thiruvengadam, Venkatesan and Gnanavel are the plaintiffs. The said Krishnasami and Rajaraman are arrayed as the defendants 10 and 11. The defendants 1 to 4 are the purchasers of some of the items of the schedule properties. The suit properties are the separate properties of Adimoolam. He executed a Will, dtd. 27/1/1969 in respect of his properties. The Will covers the properties both in Puducherry and also in Tamil Nadu. This suit is filed in respect of the properties which are described in schedule-B of the suit which are in Tamil Nadu state. As per the Will, the said Adimoolam had bequeathed the properties conferring only the life estate to all of his three sons namely, Jayaraman, Krishnasami and Rajaraman and vested the properties in the children of the said three sons. Therefore, it is only the plaintiffs, defendants 5 to 9 are the owners of the property, once the Will came into force. However, without any right whatsoever, the said brothers, who had only life estate, had sold the suit items to different persons by three registered sale deeds, of which, two are dtd. 6/6/1984 and the other is dtd. 3/7/1985. The said purchasers are arrayed as the defendants 1 to 4. Even though the defendants 10 and 11 have life estate, considering their attitude, the suit is filed for partition and separate possession.

(3.) The other co-sharers namely, the defendants 5 to 9 had filed a written statement, supporting the case of the plaintiffs and that they also sought for partition and they paid Court fees in respect of their shares.