MINAKSHI AYI Vs. SUBRAMANIAN CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chokkalingam Pillai died about 35 years ago leaving no issue, and on his death two widows, Valliammai and Minakshiayi, inherited his properties. The two widows sold certain properties belonging to the estate to pay off the debts incurred by their husband. Chokkalingam Pillai, and afterwards they entered-into an oral partition by which each got about nine kulies of land; old survey No. 46-C was among the properties thus divided by them. And in that partition Valliammai got the western half of this survey number, while Meenakshiayi, defendant 5 in the suit, got the eastern half of this survey number. Valliammai alienated the western half of survey No. 46-C to the plaintiff's predecessor-in-title from whom the plaintiff purchased the same. Valliammai died in 1916. The plaintiff as purchaser of Valliammai's right, in the western moiety of survey No. 46-C, instituted the original suit for possession of the same from defendants 1 to 4 who were let into possession by the plaintiff's vendor. Defendant 5, Meenakshiayi, put forward her right to possession of the western half on the death of her co-widow. Valliammai, and she executed a lease deed in favour of defendant 1 in respect of the said western portion.

(2.) The dispute between the parties centered on the question whether on the death of Valliammai, defendant 5 was entitled to possession of the suit properties. This again depended on the question as to the exact effect of the oral partition entered into between the two widows, Valliammai and defendant 5 in or about 1894.

(3.) The District Munsif dismissed the suit, holding that it was not proved to his satisfaction that Valliammai and defendant 5 divided their husbands properties with absolute right of ownership and precluding the rights of survivorship inter se.