CHELADURAI NAINAR Vs. GOVINDASAMY NAINAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree, dated 9.8.1994, made in A.S.No,8 of 1991, on the file of the Sub Court, Chidambaram, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 11.9.1990, made in O.S.No.16 of 1985, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chidambaram.

(2.) THE suit, in O.S.No.16 of 1985, had been filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and for recovery of possession.

(3.) THE plaintiff had paid the money for the purchase of the A schedule property. Since, the plaintiff was residing at Singapore, the property had been purchased in the name of his father. THE A schedule property had not been mentioned in the partition deed, dated 19.6.1964, as it was purchased in the name of the plaintiff and it was under the proceedings of the Court. THE C schedule property had been purchased by Pazhamalai Nainar from one Chinnathambi Mudaliar. Pazhamalai Nainar had decided to give the said property to the family of his daughter, for a certain amount. THErefore, the said property had not been included in the partition. Pazhamalai Nainar had wished that if the C schedule property was not transferred to his daughter, then, it should be taken by the plaintiff. THErefore, in the partition deed, it had been stated that the properties left out of the partition could be taken by the plaintiff. In such circumstances, the defendants 1 and 2 had written a release deed, dated 26.6.1964, releasing their rights in the said property. THE said release deed had not been registered due to the fact that the properties in question had been allotted to the plaintiff by way of the partition deed. THErefore, the plaintiff is entitled to the said properties and that the defendants 1 and 2 did not have any right in them.