KALIAMMAL AND ORS. Vs. SUNDARAMMAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of a suit filed by the first respondent in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Salem to recover possession of the properties set out in Schedule A to the plaint as the sole surviving daughter and heir of her father, one Chinnaswarni Kandar, after the death of her mother, Meenakshi Ammal. Originally, there were ten defendants of whom the first defendant was the main contesting defendant and defendants 2 to 10 claimed to be lessees under him. The first defendant died soon after the institution of the suit and defendants 11 to 15 were brought on record as his legal representatives. But the 11 th defendant disclaimed all interest in the suit properties and therefore may be left out of consideration. The suit was decreed and hence the appeal by defendants 12 to 15 as the legal representatives of the first defendant.

(2.) ONE Kolanda Karuppa Kandar had two wives. By his first wife, he had two sons, Kumarasami and Swami; and by his second wife two sons, Periasami and Chinnasami. Chinnasami was married to Meenakshi, the mother of the plaintiff, and he had by her two daughters, the plaintiff and another who died in or about 1930, leaving a son. Periasami married two wives and by his first wife had a daughter, and by his second wife Vellayyammal, two daughters. The first defendant is one of the sons of Swami, the other son being the 11th defendant Chinnasami died in or about 1907, Periasami died on 14th June, 1926, leaving him surviving Vellayyammal and his three daughters. Meenakshi died on 26th August, 1942.

(3.) AS already stated, Chinnasami died in or about 1907, leaving behind him his widow Meenakshi and his two daughters including the plaintiff. On Periasami's death in June 1926, disputes arose between Vellayyammal, the widow of Periasami, and Meenakshi, the widow of Chinnasami on the one side, and Appavu Kandar, the first defendant on the other side. The disputes came to a head when the two widows filed a suit O.S. No. 45 of 1926 in the Court of the District Judge of Salem against the first defendant in the main, though the other members of the family and their servants were added as party defendants. The plaint proceeded on the basis that Periasami and Chinnasami had become divided in status on account of the consent decree already mentioned, that on.the death of Chinnasami, his widow Meenakshi, became entitled to his properties and that on the death of Periasami, Vellayyammal, his sole surviving widow became entitled in like manner to her husband's property. The suit was resisted by the first defendant, and his defence was based upon two main allegations, namely, (1) as between Periasami and Chinnasami there was only a " paper partition " and it was never acted upon; the lands were never divided nor enjoyed separately and the two brothers continued as members of a joint family. The legal position was stated as follows: