SOMASUNDARAM MUDALIAR Vs. KSRAJAPPA MUDALIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a suit for enforcing the registration of a portion of a certain document. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit. The District Judge decreed it. The defendants appeal.

(2.) The document in question is a partition-deed between the plaintiff and the first defendant who are brothers. The whole document except paragraph 8 was registered. The suit relates only to paragraph 8. Defendants 2 and 3 are the sons of the first defendant. Paragraph 8 of the, document runs thus: Since we have allowed our aunt, Kuppanni to enjoy for her maintenance 41 acres 31 cents of land purchased by our natural guardian and grandmother Muthanni in her name in Singalanthi, Pandi and other villages in the Thiruthuraipundi Taluk, we shall divide the said property between ourselves in moieties after her death.

(3.) Befbre I discuss the question of law I will clear up the further facts necessary for deciding this case. The plaint after alleging that the grandmother of the parties purchased certain lands, Has got a schedule annexed to it in which the lands are specifically described. In the schedule, survey numbers are given, the villages are mentioned and they are Singalanthi and Pandi and no other, and the total extent is given which slightly differs from the extent in the partition deed and the extent in the sale-deeds. But whatever variation there may be in the extent, this amounts to an allegation on the part of the plaintiff that the lands purchased by the grandmother and described as 41 acres 37 cents in the partition-deed are the lands which are given in the schedule to the plaint though described as a slightly different area and no other. The defendants in their written statement do not allege that the grandmother purchased lands in other villages than Singalanthi and Pandi nor do they plead that there are other lands besides the lands mentioned in the plaint schedule so purchased by her. We must take it therefore that the defendants admit that the lands mentioned in the plaint schedule are the lands purchased by their grandmother. It would appear that the sale deeds taken by the grandmother were filed in the first Court but were not formally exhibited. This is what the District Judge says about them: The documents under which the lands were purchased were filed in the Lower Court. But as there was no dispute about it the documents were not formally exhibited. They were also produced in this Court though no special petition was put in to exhibit them in the case here. As even in this Court there is no dispute about the documents I do not exhibit them.