NAVANEETHAM Vs. SHANMUGAVADIVELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant in the suit is the appellant. The suit was filed by the plaintiff/first respondent herein claiming partition of 1/3rd share in the suit property. The suit was decreed holding that the plaintiff is entitled for l/3rd share in the suit property. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as they were arrayed before the Court below.

(3.) The facts as projected in the plaint is that the defendants and one Subramaniam, who is not a party to the suit, are sons of Meenakshi ammal. The said Subramaniam, even during his early days, left the house and living as a nomad and subsequently he died. Since Meenakshi ammal belonged to Hindu religion, as per Hindu Succession Act, after the demise of Meenakshi ammal, the property would vest on the plaintiff and defendants equally and the plaintiff is entitled to l/3rd share in the suit property. Further, Meenakshi ammal has purchased the suit property by means of a registered sale deed dated 10.10.1932 and she has not executed any will. In other words, Meenakshi ammal died intestate in the year 1960. After the death of Meenakshi ammal, the suit property was enjoyed jointly by the plaintiff and defendants together. Subsequently, due to misunderstanding, the plaintiff has issued a legal notice seeking his share in the suit property. Even after receipt of the notice, the defendants have not chosen to divide the suit property, hence, the suit.