RAMASWAMI CHETTY Vs. PALANIAPPA CHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a family partition suit, between Nattukottai Chatties and is confined to properties named in B and D schedules, which were included by the first Court, among those to be partitioned, but were struck out, by the District Judge in first appeal.

(2.) The case of the D schedule properties may be dealt; with first. The Subordinate Judge says: Ii addition to the properties, mentioned in the plaint, there is a sum of Rs. 1,500 in deposit in a Pegu firm. The plaintiff did not know of it. It is given out in the deposition of the 1 defendant that it in family money. Therefore, it will be treated as family property, which must be divided between all the members of the family. So another schedule will be attached to the decree and that will be D schedule, consisting of this money of fig 1,500. Of course, plaintiff must pay Court-fee before a final decree is passed and it is only then, that he will get his share.

(3.) The District Judge has excluded this property from partition, solely on the technical ground that there has been no amendment of the plaint so as to include it. We think this is not a sufficient ground. It is not denied that the property is joint family property and it is clear that the omission to have the plaint amended at the same time that the D schedule was attached to it, was a mere oversight. In fact, the addition of the schedule implies an amendment of the plaint without which it would be meaningless. We direct that this property be included in the partition, and that the decree be amended accordingly.