(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant herein.
(2.) THE suit was filed by the plaintiff for declaration and permanent injunction. THE property measuring 1.13 acres comprised in S. No. 229/3 and situate in the village of Senthurai, is the suit property. THE 1st defendant is the wife of the 4th defendant. Defendants 2,3,8 and 9 are the children of the defendants 1 and 4 the 7th defendant is the 1st wife of the 4th defendant. Defendants 5 and 6 are the children of the 7th defendant born of the 4th defendant. THE suit property belonged to the 4th defendant, who on 12.6.1975, after receiving a consideration of Rs. 3,600 executed a sale in favour of the plaintiff. THE sale was executed by the 4th defendant himself and as guardian of his minor children, defendants 8 and 9. As per the recitals in the sale deed, the promissory note executed by the 4th defendant on 1.6.1974 was discharged. THE plaintiff is a bona fide purchaser of the property for value. THE defendants 1 to 3 filed a suit in O.S. No. 344 of 1975 for payment of maintenance and obtained a decree collusively. In execution of the said decree, the suit property was brought up for sale. THE defendants 1 to 3 are disputing the right and title of the plaintiff to the suit property. All the defendants are residing in the same house in the village of Kattuthular. THE plaintiff is not a party to the maintenance suit. Hence, the decree is not binding upon him. Since the title of the plaintiff to the suit property is denied, the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration, restraining the defendants from bringing the properties to auction.
(3.) AT the time, when the second appeal was admitted, the following substantial question of law was formulated for consideration: "Is the 1st defendant entitled to charge over suit property punja 1.13 acres on the basis of maintenance decree against the 4th defendant, the plaintiff's vendor, when her husband, the 4th defendant himself died and she got substantial properties from her husband as his heir"