K. N. Phaneendra, J.

This appeal is preferred against the concurrent findings of the judgment rendered by Senior Civil Judge, Maddur, in O.S. No.38/2007 dated 27.01.2012 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for partition and delivery of separate possession of his half () share in the suit schedule property, which is confirmed by the Principal District Judge, Mandya, by its judgment dated 25.04.2013 in RA No.33/2012.

2. The brief factual matrix of the case is that, the plaintiff and the 1st defendant are the direct brothers. After the death of their father-Channegowda in the year 1976, they have partitioned the suit schedule property and other ancestral properties in the year 1982. As per the partition, in the Suit Schedule Site, plaintiff has got 65 ft. x 45 ft. and the remaining extent of 65 ft. x 125 ft. was allotted to the 1st defendant. Since long, they have been in possession and enjoyment of their respective shares. It is also admitted that after the said oral partition, the plaintiff has sold some of his properties fallen to his share and likewise, the 1st defendant also sold some properties fallen to his share. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the 1st de