G RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. JAGADAMBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant is the appellant in this Letters Patent appeal. THE plaintiff is the sister and the defendant is her younger brother.

(2.) ONE Kanaka Kavandar had three daughters viz. , kamlambal, Valambal and Meenakshi. He executed a will and died on 23-7-1923. In this will he gave certain properties to this two younger daughters Valambal and meenakshi on condition that they should enjoy the same without any power of alienation till their life time and after their death the properties should to go to heirs absolutely. Valambal and Meenakshi partitioned the properties between them and each of them was in possession of separate portions, in that partition the plaint'a'schedule property was allotted to meenakshi. The plaintiff is the daughter and the defendant is the son of the said meenakshi.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant-defendant attempted to advance the same argument before us also, but as found by the learned single Judge two of the four brothers have been examined in the case and they have clearly stated that there had already been a partition among the four lieve thern. It is not in dispute that'b'schedule properties are in exclusive possession of the defendant and therefore there is no substance in the contention of the first defendant that there was no partition among the said four brothers. Hence we find there is no case for the appellant-defendant as regards'b'schedule properties also.