M. SHEELA Vs. R. VISALATCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal Suit filed against the judgment and decree passed in the partition suit O.S.No. 365 of 2019.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff /Vatsala:

(3.) Panchatcharam died in the year 1970 leaving behind his wife, son and two daughters. The daughters got married after the demise of Panchatcharam. Even after marriage, the plaintiff used to visit the village and inspect the properties as co-owner. Ponnammal, the wife of Panchatcharam died in the year 2014. After the death of Panchatcharam, his only son Munusamy as Karta of the family was maintaining the ancestral properties on behalf of other members of the family. The properties were enjoyed by all the children of Panchatcharam as joint family property. The plaintiff requested her brother Munusamy for partition during his life time. He gave evasive reply and did not consider her request. After the death of Munusamy, she came to know about the collusive partition deed dtd. 2/3/2016 between her brother Munusamy and his children. Also, came to know that patta for the properties has also been mutated in their name. Being the daughter of Panchatcharam and the property is the ancestral property, the plaintiff is entitled for 1/3rd share in the property. The partition within the family of Munusamy for entire property excluding the other two legal heirs is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff.