L H VIDYAPOORNAN Vs. L H PREMAVATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant in O. S. A. No. 148 of 2000 is the 5th defendant in the suit in C. S. No. 522 of 1992 and the respondents 1 to 5 are the plaintiff and the defendants 1, 2, 4 and 6 respectively. The appellant in O. S. A. No. 149 of 2000 is the plaintiff in T. O. S. No. 31 of 1998 (5th defendant in C. S. No. 522 of 1992) and the respondents 1 to 3 are the defendants 1 to 3 in T. O. S. No. 31 of 1998 (defendants 1, 2 and plaintiff in C. S. No. 522 of 1992) respectively.

(2.) SINCE the learned single Judge tried both the suits jointly after recording evidence in C. S. No. 522 of 1992 and treating the same as the evidence in the other suit also, the parties and witnesses referred to in C. S. No. 522 of 1992 are referred to hereunder as they were referred to in the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge for the sake of convenience. Thus, the common judgment is pronounced with reference to these appeals.

(3.) THE plaintiff in C. S. No. 522 of 1992 filed the suit for partition and separate possession of 1/7th share in item Nos. 1 to 4 of 'a' schedule and l/4th share in gold ornaments, silver articles and other articles mentioned in the plaint 'b', 'c' and 'd' schedule. Similarly, the 5th defendant in the said suit filed the suit in T. O. S. No. 31 of 1998 on the basis of Ex. B-1, the last will and testament executed by his mother Kamalammal to grant letters of administration in his favour. The learned single Judge, having analysed the evidence, both oral and documentary adduced on either side and upon hearing both sides, granted a decree for partition in respect of 1/6th share in the properties left behind by the parents of the plaintiff and consequently, dismissed the suit filed by the 5th defendant on the basis of the will executed by his mother. Hence, the 5th defendant has preferred these appeals as against the common judgment and decrees passed in the said suits by the learned single Judge.