MANOHARAN Vs. RANGABASHYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. Disposition before lower court:- The plaintiff, who filed a suit for partition of 1/6th share, was non-suited on the ground that he had not established that the first defendant was his father and further that the properties were available for partition. II. Contentions of the plaintiff:-

(2.) THE plaintiff's contention was that the first defendant had married a person by name Vedavalli and out of the said marriage, the plaintiff was born on 4.1.1958. THE first defendant had not taken care of his wife and even at the time when the plaintiff was in the womb, his mother left the matrimonial home and he was born only subsequent to the separation of the plaintiff's mother from the first defendant.

(3.) THE trial Court found that the release deed Ex.B.8 was true and the first defendant had not been possessed of any right in the property. As regards the issue whether the plaintiff is the legitimate son of the first defendant, the Court found that there was no necessity to enter into the said finding, having regard to the fact that there was no partible properties in which the plaintiff could claim a share.V. THE validity of alleged release, the critical issue:-