FARITHA AMMAL Vs. K M AHAMAD SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Second Appeal, challenge is made to the judgment and decree dated 20.11.2014 passed in A.S.No.36 of 2013 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Manargudi, reversing the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2013 passed in O.S.No.96 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi.

(2.) The parties are referred to as per rankings in the trial court.

(3.) Suit for possession and mense profits. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that his wife Jainam bugari died on 18.07.2005 and the plaintiff is the only heir of the deceased wife and the defendant is the elder sister of the plaintiff's wife and on 31.05.2002, the plaintiff's wife, the defendant and their two sisters and one brother effected partition in respect of the properties belonging to them by way of a deed of partition and in the said partition, the "D" schedule properties of the partition deed had been allotted to the share of the plaintiff's wife and the defendant was allotted the "B" schedule properties described therein and other sharers were allotted the other properties as described in the deed and thereafter, the sharers had been in possession and enjoyment of the respective shares allotted to them and accordingly the plaintiff's wife was in possession of the "D" schedule properties and she died intestate and accordingly, following the death of his wife, it is only the plaintiff, who has been in the possession and enjoyment of her properties namely the suit properties and while so, when the plaintiff went to Malaysia in connection with his work, the defendant without any authority had encroached into the plaint schedule properties and after the return of the plaintiff from Malaysia, despite the demand of the plaintiff to hand over the possession of the plaint schedule properties, the defendant refused to accede to the same and accordingly, the plaintiff had issued a legal notice on 06.10.2010, demanding the entrustment of the plaint schedule properties and the defendant did not respond to the said notice and accordingly, inasmuch as the plaintiff is entitled to claim half share in the suit properties as the legal heir of his wife under the Mohamadian Law, accordingly, it is stated that the plaintiff has been necessitated to lay the suit for appropriate reliefs.