1. The plaintiff, who lost the battle for partition in both the Courts, preferred this second appeal under Section 100 CPC, questioning the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 08.04.2004 passed in A.S.No.45 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the III Additional District Judge (FTC-II), at Khammam, upholding the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2000 passed in O.S.No.129 of 1991 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this second appeal will, hereinafter, be referred to as they were arrayed in the suit. The first defendant, who is no more, is not arrayed as respondent and defendant Nos.2 to 7 are arrayed as respondent Nos.1 to 6 respectively.

3. The facts leading to the filing of the present second appeal, in nutshell, are as follows :

4. Yeluru Seshaiah and Yeluru Appaiah who are brothers by full blood, owned agricultural land in Gundrathimaduvu village of Khammam Taluq and district and the said land was submerged under Wyra reservoir. The first defendant and one Ramaiah are the sons of Yeluru Seshaiah. Second defendant is elder son and third defendant is the younger son of the first defendant. The plaintiff is the son of second defendant. The plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 3 are members of Hindu Mithakshara co-parcenery joint family. At the time of marriage of the first defendant with one Ramulamma, his father-in-law Katta Lakshmi Narsaiah presented Rs.116/- and one cow and one calf to the first defendant. Appaiah the paternal uncle of the first defendant also presented Rs.116/- and one cow and one calf to the first defendant at the time of marriage. The first defendant also got compensation in respect of the land submerged in Wyra reservoir. Ramulamma-the first wife of the first defendant died after she gave birth to the second defendant. The first defendant married one Hanumayamma (defendant No.4), who is the own sister of Ramulamma through whom the first defendant begot one son i.e., defendant No.3 and three daughters (defendant Nos.5 to 7). First defendant is the Kartha of the joint family and he used to manage the entire joint family properties. Second defendant under the guidance of the first defendant performed the marriages of his sisters and brother. First defendant, with the amounts gifted to him at the time of marriage and the amount received towards compensation for the land acquired for Wyra reservoir, has purchased Item No.1 of the suit schedule property admeasuring Ac.9.34 guntas (Wet land of Ac.3.00 and dry land of Ac.6.34 guntas) from its pattedar Nawab Ahmad Jung Bahadur on 01.11.1955. First defendant was the tenant of the said Nawab prior to the purchase of the Item No.1 of the suit schedule property. Item Nos.2 to 5 of the suit schedule property were purchased by the first defendant with the income derived from Item No.1 of the suit schedule property. Second defendant, being a Government employee, worked at different places. First defendant had become a pawn at the hands of his wife Hanumayamma (defendant No.4). The acts of defendant Nos.1 to 3, at the instance of Hanumayamma, are causing detriment to the interest of the plaintiff. The plaintiff had placed the matter before elders in the month of July 1991, but the defendants have paid deaf ear to the advice of the elders. Hence the plaintiff, having no other alternative, filed the suit for partition of the suit schedule properties into six equal shares and allot one such share to him and also for future mesne profits.

5. First defendant filed written statement admitting the inter-se relationship between the parties, inter alia contending that he had not inherited any property from his ancestors so as to constitute any nucleus for the unfounded joint family of the plaintiff and defendants. Yeluru Appaiah was not having any agricultural land. If at all any gifts were given to the first defendant, they do not constitute the joint family property. First defendant and h