AMEENAMBAL BEEVI Vs. GOPALASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff and the 2nd defendant in OS.No.120 of 1982 have preferred the above second appeals against the judgment and decree dated 10.1.1989 made in AS.No.165 of 1987 on the file of the Additional District Court, Ramanathapuram at Madurai.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for partition of the suit properties and for allotment of 1/2 share and for rendition of accounts by the defendants 1 and 2.

(3.) THOUGH several substantial questions of law are raised in SA.No.2018 of 1989, argument has been advanced by both the parties only in respect of question No.1 i.e. "Whether the lower appellate court acted illegally and misdirected itself in holding that Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act will be attracted to the devolution of property of a Hindu female under Section 15 of the Act"" In SA.No.850 of 1990, the only substantial question of law raised is "Was the lower appellate court justified in upholdi ng the plaintiff's title to the suit property, especially when it had not chosen to accept a part of the plaintiff's case which found favour with the trial court""