V DEVARAJAN Vs. R PURUSHOTHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff.

(2.) THE suit was filed for permanent injunction. According to the plaintiff, the suit property is an undivided property among the plaintiff and other co -sharers, including one B. Rengasamy Naidu. In O.S.No.257 of 1946, a large item of property was sought to be partitioned. The said B. Rengasamy Naidu has half share in the entire property. The plaintiff got 2/24 i.e., 1/12th share in the suit property. In O.S.No. 257 of 1946, the Court directed the suit property to be sold and shared by the sharers, but that was not done. The defendants 2 and 3 purchased a portion of the suit property from Rengasamy Naidu. They were attempting to put up some construction in the undivided suit property. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit.

(3.) THE third defendant has stated in her written statement that she purchased a portion from Rengasamy Naidu, son of Srinivasan, a specified portion which was in enjoyment of his vendors. She also states that each co -sharer is in possession of certain area in the suit property for the purpose of enjoyment. According to her also the remedy for the plaintiff is to file a suit for partition.