SASIKUMAR Vs. K SULOCHANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second defendant in the suit in O.S.No.469 of 1994 is the appellant before this Court.

(2.) O.S.No. 469 of 1994 was filed by the first respondent/plaintiff against her husband Thiru Amirtharaj for maintenance. The first respondent herein is the first plaintiff in the suit and she filed the suit not only for herself but also on behalf of her three minor children who are plaintiffs 2 to 4 in the suit.

(3.) WHEN the suit was pending, Item No.1 of the suit schedule property was alientated and the purchaser was impleaded in the suit at the behest of the plaintiffs on 20-02-1988 in I.A.No.489 of 1996. The second defendant filed a written statement wherein it was stated that there was no matrimonial relationship between the first plaintiff and the first defendant. In so far as Item No.1 of the suit schedule property is concerned, it was not properly described in the schedule and this was purchased by him from all the legal heirs of one Poul Nadar who originally owned Item No.1 of the suit property. He further contended that the said Poul Nadar had a wife, four daughters and one son who is the first defendant in the suit. According to him, he purchased the property from all the six persons and therefore, he became the absolute owner of Item No.1 of the suit property. WHEN there are other properties and when the husband is a Government employee, the plaintiffs could only proceed against the other properties and salary and they could not proceed against Item No.1. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the suit in so far as the Item No.1 of the suit schedule property.