SUNDARAVALLI AMMAL Vs. PERUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff who succeeded before the trial court in getting the decree against the defendants and failed before the lower appellate court, has filed the above second appeal.

(2.) THE plaintiff/appellant filed a suit in O.S.No.302 of 1981 on the file of the Sub Court, Dindigul for partition and separate possession of her half share in the plaint "A" and "B" schedule properties and for damages for use and occupation from the defendants 3 to 5 and 7 to 9. According to the plaintiff, the suit properties originally belonged to the plaintiff's father late Arumugam Pillai who died on 1.8.1956 intestate leaving his wife Pappathi Ammal, the plaintiff and the first defendant as his legal heirs. THE other defendants are the alienees of the first defendant. THE said Pappathi Ammal died on 29.6.1973. According to the plaintiff, after the death of Arumugam Pillai, the suit properties devolved on his heirs, namely, Pappathi Ammal, the plaintiff as his daughter and the first defendant as his son, each entitled to l/3rd share. THE plaintiff has further submitted that the said Pappathi Ammal executed a will dated 9.1.1973 in favour of the plaintiff in respect of half share in the first item of the plaint "A" schedule properties.

(3.) THE Apex Court, in the decision in Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil v. Balwant Babusahed Patil Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil v. Balwant Babusahed Patil Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil v. Balwant Babusahed Patil , A.I.R. 1995 S.C. 895 has held as follows: