SANGILI Vs. JEYAKODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants are the appellants herein and the plaintiff is the respondent in the present second appeal. For the sake of convenience, the ranking in the suit is referred in the present second appeal.

(2.) The suit is filed to declare the plaintiff as the legal heir of the first defendant, then to divide the suit schedule properties and grant ¼ share, to appoint Advocate Commissioner to the divide the properties in metes and bounds and to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants from encumbering the suit schedule properties until the final decree is passed in the partition application. After considering the evidence and the deposition of the parties, the Trial Court had allowed the suit as far as the prayer of declaration to declare the plaintiff as the legal heir of the first defendant. However, dismissed the suit as far as prayer of partition and to grant ¼ share in the suit schedule property and aggrieved over the same the plaintiff had preferred the first appeal. The defendants had suffered a decree as far as the plea of legal heir is concerned, but has not preferred any appeal. The First Appellate Court had allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff. Aggrieved over the same, the defendants had preferred the present second appeal. Since the defendants had not preferred any appeal against the finding that the plaintiff is the legal heir of the first defendant, the finding that the plaintiff is the legal heir of the first defendant had attained finality. Now the defendants have preferred this appeal against the judgment of the First Appellate Court for granting of partition of one fourth share in the suit schedule property.

(3.) The present second appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law: