SENGUTTUVAN Vs. MUTHUKALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved over the dismissal of the suit filed for partition, the present appeal came to be filed by the plaintiff. The parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the plaintiff's case is as follows:-

(3.) The second defendant remained ex parte. The first defendant denying the entire allegations of the plaintiff that the second defendant is the drunkard and leading wayward life. It is the contention of the first defendant that the second defendant has borrowed Rs. 40,000.00 from him on 8.12.1996 for his urgent family necessity agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest at Rs. 2.00 per hundred per month. As he failed to repay any amount either towards principal or interest, he filed a suit for recovery of money in O.S.No. 1 of 1999, on the file of the Sub-Court, Mettur. The above suit was decreed ex parte on 8.4.1999. The petition filed to set aside the ex parte decree by the second defendant was also dismissed for default. It is also denied the allegation that the sale was not properly conducted. It is the contention of the first defendant that even after ex parte decree the second defendant has failed to pay the amount. Therefore, Execution Petition was filed in E.P.No. 23 of 2000 and in the Execution Proceedings the properties were brought into auction. The first defendant with the permission of the Court, purchased the properties and he alone is in possession of the properties and the suit is filed by the plaintiff in collusion with the second defendant. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.