RANGASWAMY Vs. THIMMAKKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the 3rd defendant's Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below though there is a degree of divergence between the judgments and decrees of the trial court and that of the first appellate Court. The parties to this appeal will be referred to by the position and ranks assigned to them in the trial Court. During the pendency of the litigation, the plaintiff respondent 1 died and she is represented by her legal representatives who have been brought on record and they are the daughter Lakkamma who was not a party to the proceedings in the Courts below and her son the 1st defendant.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the Original Suit No. 207/1969 in the Court of the Munsiff at tiptur. She filed the suit as an indigent under Order 33 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. She wanted a declaration of her title to 1/4th share in the suit schedule properties and for partitition of the same by metes and bounds and for possession of the said properties that fall to her share with mesne profits from date of suit till date of possession.

(3.) It was her case that she was the widow of one Pandit Rangegowda who died some 20 years before the filing of the suit. He was living jointly with 1st defendant his son. Defendants 2 and 5 are the wives of the 1st defendant while defendant-3 is the son of the 1st and 2nd defendants. Defendants 3 and 4 are the sons of the 1st and 2nd defendants and defendant-6 is the son of defendants 1 and 5. Defendant 7 is a stranger to the family who has purchased some of the joint family properties on account of the sale effected by the 1st defendant. The plaintiff further alleged that the defendants had a partition about four years prior to the filing of the suit in which no share was assigned to the plaintiff. It is in these circumstances that the suit was presented for declaration of her share and partition by metes and bounds and for possession of her share in the properties.