PRESENTATION CONVENT Vs. SOMASUNDARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The eighth defendant, who was the purchaser of the property from the Defendants 1 and 2, is before this Court challenging the finding of the trial Court holding that the sale deeds dtd. 12/4/2006 as null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs in respect of their shares is concerned.

(2.) The following facts are necessary for disposal of this appeal: The suit property originally belong to one Dhanabakyammal. She died intestate leaving behind three sons and four daughters. Defendants 1 and 2 and 4th Plaintiff and 8th plaintiff are the surviving sons and daughters of said Dhanabakyammal. Plaintiffs 1 to 3 and Defendants 3 to 5 are the legal heirs of Jagadeeshwari, another daughter of Dhanabakyammal. It is their contention that Defendants 1 and 2, who were in enjoyment of the property without the consent of other sharers, sold the property to 7 th and 8th defendants stating that they are the only legal heirs and executed the Power of Attorney in favour of one P.Alagarsamy. They dealt with the property in favour of the 7th and 8th defendants. Hence the plaintiffs being the sharers filed a suit seeking preliminary decree besides challenging the documents executed by Defendants 1 and 2. Defendants 2 to 7 and 10 to 13 remained ex parte. 8th defendant, who is the purchaser, alone contested the suit. According to him, he has purchased the property from Defendants 1 and 2. In fact Defendants 1 and 2 were in possession of the properties and he has purchased the property on 12/4/2007 and 9/5/2007 from Power of Attorney of Defendants 1 and 2 and he is the bonafide purchaser. The 8th defendant has also taken the plea of non-joinder of necessary parties.

(3.) Based on the above pleadings, following issues were framed.