RAMASAMY MUDALIAR Vs. ALAGATHAI ANNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for partition filed by plaintiffs 1 and 2 claiming to be the illegitimate sons of one Kumaraswami Mudali against defendant 1,. his widow. Defendants 2 and 3 are the daughters of defendant 1. Defendant i is the daughter-in-law of a deceased daughter. Defendant 5 is defendant 3's husband's brother. Defendant 6 is the son of defendant 3. Defendants 7 and 11 are the brothers of defendant 1's husband. Defendants 8, 9 and 10 are the sons of defendant 7. Defendant 12 is the mother of plaintiffs 1 and 2.

(2.) The case for plaintiffs 1 and 2 is that Ramasundarathammal, their mother was under the continuous concubinage of Kumaraswami Mudali ever since she attained maturity and they are her sons by Kumaraswami Mudali that they (plaintiffs 1 and 2) and defendant 12 were under the protection of Kumaraswami Mudali till his death and under Hindu Law they are entitled to a share in Kumaraswami Mudali's estate. On the death of Kumaraswami Mudali and during the minority of plaintiffs 1 and 2, their mother filed pauper suit No. 40 of 1910 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tinnevelly, and she entered into a rajinama agreeing to receive Rs. 1,675 in full settlement of the plaintiff's claim. It is alleged that the rajinama was not bona fide and was entirely prejudicial to plaintiffs 1 and 2 and that it was entered into because defendant 12 was under the influence of defendant 1 and was defrauded, she being helpless and not having proper advice. They state that the compromise is not binding on them and claim their share in their father's estate. Various schedules are annexed to the plaint.

(3.) Defendant 1 denies that plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the illegitimate sons of Kumaraswami Mudali or that they are entitled to any share in his estate. She states that their mother is a dancing girl and was not the permanently kept concubine of Kumaraswami Mudali, that the compromise in O.S. No. 40 of 1910 was bona fide and is valid and binding on plaintiffs 1 and 2. She raises some other defences with regard to the schedules annexed to the plaint which it is unnecessary to consider in this appeal.