KALIAMMAL Vs. SUNDARAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the first respondent in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Salem to recover possession of the properties set out in Schedule A to the plaint as the sole surviving daughter and heir of her father, one Chinnaswarni Kandar, after the death of her mother, Meenakshi Ammal. Originally, there were ten defendants of whom the first defendant was the main contesting defendant and defendants 2 to 10 claimed to be lessees under him. The first defendant died soon after the institution of the suit and defendants 11 to 15 were brought on record as his legal representatives. But the 11 th defendant disclaimed all interest in the suit properties and therefore may be left out of consideration. The suit was decreed and hence the appeal by defendants 12 to 15 as the legal representatives of the first defendant.

(2.) One Kolanda Karuppa Kandar had two wives. By his first wife, he had two sons, Kumarasami and Swami; and by his second wife two sons, Periasami and Chinnasami. Chinnasami was married to Meenakshi, the mother of the plaintiff, and he had by her two daughters, the plaintiff and another who died in or about 1930, leaving a son. Periasami married two wives and by his first wife had a daughter, and by his second wife Vellayyammal, two daughters. The first defendant is one of the sons of Swami, the other son being the 11th defendant Chinnasami died in or about 1907, Periasami died on 14 June, 1926, leaving him surviving Vellayyammal and his three daughters. Meenakshi died on 26 August, 1942.

(3.) After the death of Kolanda Karuppa Kandar, Chinnasami, the father of the plaintiff, filed a suit O.S. No. 10 of 1892, in the Court of the District Judge of Salem against his three brothers for a partition of the family properties. This suit ended in a reference to arbitration, and an award was the result. In spite of this, however, in 1895, Chinnasami and Periasami filed two suits, O.S. Nos. 24 and 25 of 1895, respectively, in the District Court of Salem for recovery of their respective one-fourth shares, together with mesne profits. These suits were con-cluded by a razinama dated 21 December, 1896 and marked as Ex. P.-1 in the case. A decree was passed in accordance with the razinama on 6 January, 1897. The razinama contained separate lists of properties falling to the respective shares of the four brothers and provided that pattas in respect of the respective properties shall be transferred to their respective names.