THIPPA SOUNDARARAJAN Vs. THIMMA VENKATARAMAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first defendant, who -failed in both the Courts below, is the appellant. The respondents filed the suit for partition claiming one -fourth share in, the suit properties.

(2.) THERE is no dispute that the suit properties belonged originally to three brothers - Thimma Venkataraman, Thimma Ramaswami and Thimma Rangaswami. Venkataraman had two sons, Krishnaswamy and Rajaopal. The respondents (plaintiffs 1 to 3) are the sons of Krishnaswamy. Ranga swamy, the third defendant, is the son of Rajagopal. Rangaswami had two sons, Venkatachalapathi and Venkatayyan. Saraswathi, the fourth defendant, is the widow of Venkatachalapathi. Radha, Vardhani and Sarojini, defendants 5 to 7 respectively, are the daughters of Venkatayyan. The second defendant, Nacharammal, is the daughter of Rangaswami.

(3.) THE appellant, who claims to be the son of Rangaswami's daughter Alamelu (who is not the daughter of Nagammal), admitted that Nagammal had obtained a limited interest to enjoy the suit properties for herself under the partition deed, Exhibit A -l, but contended that her estate had become enlarged under the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and that he has become the owner of those properties by virtue of the will, Exhibit B -l, which had been executed in his favour by Nagammal. Defendants 5 and 6, whose written statement was adopted by the 4th defendant, denied the will, Exhibit B -l, set up by the appellant and contended that it is a got up document. However, the will does not appear to have been seriously disputed before the Courts below and no issue has been framed regarding its genuineness. But the Courts below found that Nagammal got only a limited interest under the document, Exhibit A -1, and that Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, applied and that there was no enlargement of the right get by Nagammal under Exhibit A -l, and decreed the suit as prayed for with costs.