BALUMANI Vs. SAMIYATHAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff is the appellant herein. The suit has been laid for partition and for separate possession of Schedule 'A' to 'H'. The trial Court decreed the suit for 'A' schedule property in favour of the appellant for 5/12th share in the 'A' schedule property and in 'B' and 'F' Schedule property, 1/4th share is given to the appellant. The 'D' and 'G' schedule property are held to be one belonging to the appellant. The E,C and H schedule properties have been granted in favour of Respondent No.3 holding it as a self-acquired property. Being aggrieved over the decree which held against the appellant, the present Appeal Suit is filed.

(2.) Before the trial Court the following issues have been framed:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that insofar as 'B' and 'F' schedule property are concerned, the trial Court has committed an error in treating the properties as an ancestral one, absolutely devolving upon the father namely Rengasamy. The trial Court has failed to consider Ex.A2 in a correct prospective. Ex.A2 deals with two sets of partition. This deed speaks about partition, inter-se, grand-father of the appellant namely Rakkiyappa Gounder and his children and another one between the appellant, his father Late.Rengasamy Gounder and defendant No.2. Thus the partition indeed take place in the year 1991. This document is a registered one and therefore, the benefit conferred under Act 39 of 2005, cannot be extended in favour of defendant No.3. The learned counsel further submitted that on the same score, the mother of the appellant namely, defendant No.1 is also entitled for her share. It is further submitted that Schedule 'F' property is the amount deposited from the profits of 'B' schedule properties in pursuant to the decree granted earlier and therefore, based upon the decree to be granted by this Court insofar as 'B' Schedule property is concerned, the same also required to be modified accordingly. Though the grounds have been raised specially over C, E and H schedule of properties, the learned counsel would submit that this Court can pass appropriate orders based upon the evidence available.