LAXMINARAYANI AMMAL Vs. A M TARABAI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is against the judgment and decree of the 7th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in O.S.No. 6220 of 1969. THE defendants 2 to 7 are the appellants.

(2.) THIS is a suit for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff's half share in the suit property, which is house bearing door No.36, Ramakrishna Street, Madras, and for accounts. The plaintiff is the sister of the first defendant, since dead. The defendants 2 to 7 are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased first defendant. The plaintiff and the first defendant had another sister by name Padmavathi. The plaint schedule property originally belonged to one Murugesa Mudaliar, the maternal uncle of the plaintiff and the first defendant, as his self-acquired property, having been purchased by him with his own funds by a deed of sale dated 22.6.1933. His only son Mohanasundaram predeceased his father on 17.5.1930 issueless leaving behind him his widow Padmavathiammal, the sister of the plaintiff and the first defendant. The said Murugesa Mudaliar died on 19.1.1942, leaving behind him his widow Balammal and his widowed daughter-in-law Padmavathi. Both these widows inherited the schedule property under the provisions of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937. Murugesa Mudaliar's widow Balammal died on 23.1.1951, and on her death, the daughter-in-law Padmavathi got the suit property exclusively and was in possession and enjoyment of the same as absolute owner, her rights having been enlarged into a full estate under the Hindu Succession Act of 1956. The said Padmavathi died on 10.4.1966 leaving behind a will dated 24.2.1966 by and under which she bequeathed the schedule property to her sister, the plaintiff and to her brother, the deceased first defendant in equal shares to be enjoyed by them for their lives with a gift over absolutely in favour of their respective children, male and female. In T.O.S.15 of 1966 on the file of this Court, the plaintiff obtained Letters of Administration with the will annexed. The plaintiff and the first defendant are thus co-owners of the suit property. The first defendant has been receiving the rental income from the suit property ever since the death of Padmavathi and after the death of the first defendant the other defendants have been receiving the rental income. The present suit is filed for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff's half share and for accounts.

(3.) THE points that arise for determination are: