A ULAGANATHA REDDY Vs. D NANDAGOPPAL CHETTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises out of the concurrent Judgment and Decree of the Courts below :- Judgment and Decree, dated 11.12. 1997, made in A.S.No.19/1995, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Chingleput, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated, 30. 06. 1994 made in O.S.No.166 /1988 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kancheepuram.

(2.) THE facts relating to the second appeal could be briefly stated thus:- O.S.No.106/1988 :- THE suit property was originally owned by one Devathi Munirathina Chetty, father of Defendants 1 to 4. D-5 is the son of D-1. Offering to sell the suit property to the Plaintiff for Rs.23,000/-, D-1 to D-4 have executed an Agreement of Sale on 15. 07. 1984 in favour of the Plaintiff (Ex.A-1). Under the said agreement, Defendants 1 to 4 have received an advance of Rs.20,101/- and agreed to receive the balance and execute the Sale Deed. On 28. 11.1984, D-1 received a sum of Rs.8,000/- from the Plaintiff for himself and onbehalf of the Defendants 2 to 4 and made Ex.A-2 endorsement on the agreement. On 29. 01.1985, the third Defendant had received a sum of Rs.10,000/- for himself and onbehalf of his brothers and made Ex.A-3 Endorsement. D-5 son of D-1 had also joined in Ex.A-3 endorsement. THE Plaintiff was put in possession of the suit property on 29. 01.1985.

(3.) O.S.No.352/1990:- When the suit for specific performance was pending, three female heirs of Devathi Munirathina Chetty had filed this suit for partition and separate possession of their 3/7th share and for permanent injunction against the Plaintiff/Appellant herein. According to the female heirs, the suit property originally belonged to their father Devathi Munirathina Chetty, who died on 22. 01.1988 leaving the Plaintiffs and the Defendants 1 to 4 as his legal heirs to succeed his estate. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants 1 to 4 are each entitled to 1/7th share. Since the Defendants 1 to 4 are not willing to give their legitimate share to the daughters, the daughters have filed the suit for partition and separate possession and also for permanent injunction against the Appellant/Plaintiff in O.S.No.166/1988.