P. RAM MOHAN Vs. LALITHA RAGHURAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first defendant in O.S. No. 5718 of 1968 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras is the appellant herein. Respondents 1 and 2 herein filed the said suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties by metes and bounds and for allotment of a half share after allotting premises No. 48 -A Gengu Reddi Street, to the defendants, for recovery of a half share in the plaint B Schedule moveable properties or their value of Rs. 250/ -, for recovery of rental collections till date of suit after taking of accounts, for directing the defendants to pay half the rental collections at Rs. 350/ - per mensem till delivery of possession of the plaintiffs' share and for costs.

(2.) BRIEFLY the plaint allegations were as follows: Late Rao Bahadur P. Akilandam Naidu was the absolute owner of four house properties viz., Nos. 47, 48, 48 -A and 48 -B Gengu Reddi Street with garages, outhouses etc. By a settlement deed Ex. A -1 dated 17 -2 -1929, he gave the properties to himself and his wife Ranganayaki Ammal for life, to his foster son P. Parthasarathi Naidu and his wife Narayaniammal for life, and the remainder to Ram Mohan, the appellant herein (first defendant), and Raghuraman, the husband of the first plaintiff (first respondent herein) and other sons to be born to the said Parthasarathi Naidu and Narayani Ammal. Parthasarathi Naidu died on 4 -8 -1967 at Madras. Narayaniammal had predeceased him. Raghuraman also predeceased him. Parthasarathi Naidu had only two sons, the appellant and the said Raghuraman, husband of the first respondent and father of the second respondent. Parthasarathi Naidu died leaving him surviving the appellant and respondents 1 and 2. The plaintiffs (respondents 1 and 2) are residing in a portion of No. 48 Gengu Reddi Street, Egmore, Madras. They are entitled to a half share in the plaint schedule properties and also in all the moveables left by Parthasarathi Naidu worth about Rs. 20,000/ -. The plaintiffs are not able to lay hands on the said moveables excepting the items set out in the plaint B Schedule valued at Rs. 500/ - and their share therein is about Rs. 250/ -. The defendants are collecting the rentals of Rs. 700/ - a month from the properties and the plaintiffs are entitled to a moiety of the same after meeting the expenses such as taxes, repairs etc., and an account of the same has to be taken from the date of death of Parthasarathi Naidu and the amount ascertained has to be paid over to the plaintiffs. While so, the plaintiffs understood that the first defendant (appellant) and his father had settled 48 -A, Gengu Reddy Street in favour of one Vasanthammal and Anusuya (defendants 2 and 3 - respondents 3 and 4 herein), who are sisters of the first defendant. According to the plaintiffs, this is not binding on them and in the partition the said property should be allotted to the share of the defendants so that the plaintiffs may get a half share in the estate of Akilandam Naidu. The plaintiffs sent a lawyer's notice dated 16 -9 -1967, calling upon the defendants to effect a peaceful partition in respect of the plaint schedule properties; but the defendants did not comply with the requests and hence the suit.

(3.) THE second defendant filed a written statement contending that the properties bearing Nos. 47, 48, 48 -A and 48 -B Gengu Reddi Street, were originally the absolute properties of Akilandam Naidu. This defendant also denies the allegation that deceased Parthasarathi Naidu had left moveables worth Rupees 20,000/ - and in any event, he states that he is not in possession of any of them. He states that he is in possession of house No. 48 -A Gengu Reddi Street, from November 1967, and is receiving a rent of Rs. 115/ - per month from November 1967, out of which the 3rd defendant is entitled to a half share in the net income therefrom as per the terms of the settlement deed. The other contentions of this defendant are similar to those in the first defendant's written statement.