PRABHAKARAN Vs. RANGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are focused as against the judgment and decree dated passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Salem in O. S. No. 873 of 1984 dated 25. 06. 1992, which is one for partition. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

(2.) THE portrayal and parodying of the case of the plaintiff as stood exposited from the plaint, quintessentially and briefly could be set out thus: the plaintiffs 1 and 2 and the defendants 3 and 4 are the sons of the couple D1 and D2. The first item of the suit properties was obtained by D1 from his co-sharer in an oral partition. From out of the income derived from the joint family nucleus, the other items of the properties, viz. , item Nos. 2 and 3 were acquired by the co-parcenery of D1 and his four sons. It so happened that the third item of the suit properties was purchased in the name of D4 from out of the income generated from the joint family nucleus. While so, D4 sold the third item of the suit properties in favour of D6 Corporation viz. , Salem Textile Corporation represented by D5, the Managing Director. Accordingly, the plaintiffs prayed for partition and allotment of their 1/5th share each in all the items of the suit properties in favour of them.

(3.) D1 filed the written statement, which was adopted by D2, in support of the case of the plaintiffs and further supplemented by pointing out that the defendants 3 and 4 had fallen a prey to D5's trick and D4 sold the third item of the suit properties taking undue advantage of the fact that the property stood in D4's name, even though it was purchased from out of the joint family funds. Accordingly, he prayed for decreeing the suit as prayed for by the plaintiffs.