( 1 ) THIS is defendants' second appeal. The respondents were plaintiffs in the suit. The suit was one for partition and separate possession of their share in the plaint schedule properties.

( 2 ) THE plaint schedule properties consist of both immovables and movables described respectively in schedules A and B. The defendants while admitting the relationship between the parties contended inter alia that in the properties in question the plaintiffs have no share as the same were the self acquisitions of Venkataswamy, husband of the first defendant and father of the other defendants.

( 3 ) THE Trial court dismissed the suit. But the first appellate court allowing the appeal has decreed the claim. In order to better understand the rival contentions raised in the appeal we may know the genealogical tree. THIPPANNA (died a long time ago) venkataramanappa (1968) = Lingamma (Plaintiff-1) venkataswamy (died in 1966) venkatamma (Plaintiff-2)= Venkatalakshmma (Defendant-1) narayana Parvathamma (Deft. 2) (Deft. 3) rukkamma Deft. 4 Kanthamma (Deft. 5)

( 4 ) AS is clear there from first defendant's husband Venkataswamy and the second plaintiff Venkatamma were the son and daughter respectively of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document