S. MALLIKA Vs. R. KRISHNAVENI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendant in O.S.No.1319 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Salem, is the Appellant herein.

(2.) O.S.No.1319 of 2008 had been filed by R.Krishnaveni, seeking a preliminary decree of 2/3rd share with respect to two items of suit property in S.No.49/3B, AchanKuttapatti Village, Ayothiyapattinam, Salem. The first item of suit property measures 1.55 acres and the second item of suit property measures 0.46 acre, totally 2.01 acres of Punja land. By judgment and decree dtd. 10/2/2010, the learned II Additional District Munsif, Salem, had granted 1/3rd undivided share to the Plaintiff. The Defendant then filed A.S.No.97 of 2010 on the file of the I Additional Sub Court, Salem. By judgment dtd. 24/6/2011, the First Appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Trial Court is confirmed. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the Defendant had filed the present Second Appeal. The Second Appeal had been admitted on 21/10/2016, on the following four substantial questions of law:

(3.) The Plaintiff claimed that the suit property originally belonged to her grandfather C.Serangan. He had two wives namely, Lakshmi and Pappammal. He had one son Perumal and one daughter Dhanakodi through Lakshmi, his first wife, and one son Ramasamy and two daughters namely, Then and Ramayee through Pappammal, his second wife. Serangan, his first wife Lakshmi and his son Perumal died. Thereafter, there was a partition among Pappammal, the second wife of Serangan and Ramasamy, his son and Ayyammal, widow of Perumal by a registered partition deed, dtd. 15/5/1987. The suit property was allotted to the share of Perumal who was represented by Ayyammal. The Plaintiff was a minor on the date of partition. Perumal had died leaving behind Ayyammal and two daughters namely, Mariayee @ Maheswari and the Plaintiff herein, Krishnaveni. The Plaintiff thereafter, claimed 1/3rd undivided share in the suit property, in view of the amendment to the Hindu Succession Act. She claimed she was entitled to 1/2 share and another 1/3rd share in her father's 1/2 share. She consequently, claimed an undivided 2/3rd share in the suit property. The Plaintiff had married on 15/9/1994. She stated that she came to know that Ayammal and Mariayee @ Maheswari had sold the entire suit property including the share of the Plaintiff to one Muthusamy. She claimed that the sale of 2/3rd share, when she was a minor was void. She also claimed that the sale was not binding on her. Muthusamy had sold the property to the Defendant, Malliga on 24/11/2008. She claimed that the said sale deed was also not binding on her. She demanded partition and separate possession. It is under these circumstances, that the suit was filed seeking 2/3rd undivided share in the suit properties.