G. KANNAMMAL Vs. K. GOVINDASWAMY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant herein. This Second Appeal is filed against the concurrent judgments of the courts below, thereby denying her half share in the suit property. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds into two equal half shares and for allotting half share to her. The suit relief was sought for on the strength of Ex. A1 sale deed dated 16.6.1980 jointly standing in the name of the plaintiff and the first defendant, who is none else than her husband. The plaintiff and the first defendant got married on 12.06.1975. During the subsistence of marriage, the suit property was purchased jointly in the name of the plaintiff and the first defendant under Ex. A1 dated 16.6.1980. Much after the purchase of the property, misunderstanding arose between the parties, resulting in police complaint filed by the plaintiff against her husband in 1982 and HMOP. No. 59/1982 filed by the husband against the wife for dissolution of marriage on the ground that the marriage held was null and void and the decree was passed in favour of the husband by dissolving the marriage on 27.11.1984. Thereafter, the plaintiff/wife also issued a legal notice on 23.12.1986 to the first defendant/husband, claiming 1/2 share in the suit property stating that she has also contributed 1/2 share towards the sale consideration and the husband and wife had been in joint possession. The legal notice was replied by the husband, by denying her share and by denying that no amount was contributed by her for sale consideration of the suit property. According to the first defendant/husband, the entire amount was paid only by him and the name of his wife added was sham and nominal and she also executed a release deed on 27.6.1981 in respect of her share. The same was followed by the institution of the suit by the wife, claiming 1/2 share in the suit property.

(2.) The suit relief was claimed by the wife and the same was resisted by the husband by reiterating the same stand as taken in their exchange of notices. During trial, the parties examined themselves as PW 1 and DW 1. While the wife produced the registration copy of the sale deed as Ex. A1 and legal notice as Ex. A2, the defendants produced the so called relinquishment deed purportedly executed by wife in favour of the first defendant on 27.6.1981, encashment certificate purportedly issued by the Manager, IOB, Chintadripet Branch, Kist receipts standing in the name of the husband and patta pass book and small farmer's Identification Card issued by the Agricultural Officer, R.K. pet in favour of the husband/first defendant in respect of the suit property as Exs. B1 to B18 documents.

(3.) The trial court on the basis of the available evidence arrived at the conclusion that the suit property was purchased from and out of the funds of the husband and the husband has been in continuous possession of the suit property and the name of the wife was added in the sale deed, because of her relationship with the purchaser as his wife and the wife failed to prove her contribution and her joint possession and she has also relinquished her right and accordingly dismissed the suit. Aggrieved against the same, the plaintiff preferred AS. 88/2001. The lower appellate court has, by agreeing with the findings of the trial court, dismissed the appeal thereby confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court. Hence, this second appeal by the wife/plaintiff before this court.