LAKSHMI Vs. LAKSHMIKANTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Second Appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 07.09.2017 made in A.S.No.16 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpet, reversing the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2014 made in O.S.No.83 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Madurantakam.

(2.) The appellant is the plaintiff, 1st respondent is 4th defendant, respondents 2 to 4 are defendants 1 to 3 and respondents 5 to 10 are defendants 5 to 10 in O.S.No.83 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Madurantakam. The appellant filed said suit for partition and separate possession and mesne profit. According to the appellant, the suit property originally belonged to her father Venugopal Gramani. Her father by the deed of settlement dated 24.05.1963, settled the suit property on his wife Andal ammal. At the time of settlement, the respondents 2 and 3 were not born. Only the appellant and the 4th respondent, who are the daughters were born and alive. The father of the appellant has settled the property on his wife giving power to borrow money on the security of the property or alienate the property for marriage expenses of the appellant. If the properties were not sold, the appellant and the 4th respondent will be equally entitled to the suit properties. After the settlement, the respondents 2 and 3 were born. It is the intention of Venugopal Gramani that his sons must also have share in the suit property. In view of the same, the mother of the appellant/Andal ammal executed the registered settlement deed dated 29.03.1978 settling the property on the appellant and the respondents 2 and 3. The 4th respondent was not given any share. The appellant is willing to give equal share to the 4th respondent. The appellant and respondents 2 to 4 are entitled to 1/4th share each in the suit property. The respondents 2 to 4 did not agree for partition and they were evading the partition on some pre-text or other. The appellant subsequently, came to know that the respondents 2 and 3 have sold item No.3 to the respondents 5 to 8, her mother Andal ammal sold item No.1 to 1st respondent. On the above pleadings, the appellant filed said suit for partition.

(3.) The respondents 2 to 10 were set exparte. The first respondent alone filed written statement. According to the first respondent, the suit property belongs to Venugopal Gramani. By the deed of settlement dated 24.05.1963, he settled the property on his wife Andal ammal and on the settlement, Andal ammal has become absolute owner of the suit property. She obtained patta and was paying tax to the authorities. By deed of sale dated 10.07.1997, Andal ammal sold item No.1 to the first respondent and the respondents 2 and 3 have signed the said deed as witnesses. The first respondent is in possession and cultivating the property, patta No.1277 was issued in the name of the first respondent and he is in possession and enjoyment of the property as absolute owner. The settlement deed dated 29.03.1978 executed by Andal ammal has not come into force. Andal ammal cancelled the settlement deed by executing deed of cancellation. The appellant is not entitled to 1/4th share as claimed. The first respondent purchased the property from Andal ammal and is in possession and enjoyment of the property. The appellant is not in joint possession of the property. The Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as the value of the property is less than Rs.5 lakhs. The first respondent denied the title of the appellant. Without seeking the relief of declaration, the appellant is not entitled to the relief sought for in the suit. The first respondent has perfected title by adverse possession and prayed for dismissal of the suit.