BALAKRISHNAN, J.: - Defendants 1,2 and 5 in O. S. 234 of 1984 on the file of Sub-Court, Ernakulam are the appellants. The suit for partition by the first respondent herein was decreed as prayed for and the appeal is directed against that judgment and decree

2. Plaintiff, defendants 1, 3 and 4 are brothers and 5th defendant is their sister. They are the children of Parameswara Iyer and Thailambal. Second defendant is the wife of first defendant. The suit for partition was in respect of 6 3/4 cents of property with a building therein owned by Parameswara Iyer and Thailambal. Parameswara Iyer died on 9-9-93 and Thailambal died on 15-5-82. In the plaint, plaintiff alleged the following facts:

Plaintiff is the eldest child of Parameswara Iyer and Thailambal. The plaintiff had passed school final and as he could not pursue his studies due to poor financial situation he left Kerala at the age of 18 in search of some job and that he got a job in Calcutta and he had been sending money to his parents. Defendants 1, 3 to 5 therein were given proper education and defendants 1 and 3 could become graduates and the 4th defendants studied up to intermediate class and all of them later got employment. Plaintiff continued to make monthly remittance to his parents for meeting household expenses. Plaintiff's parents were residing in a rented building. At the instance of plaintiff, the building in which they were in occupation was available for purchase. Plaintiff sent money for purchasing the property in 1965. Various amounts were sent by drafts. The fifth defendant was given in marriage in 1952 and for that also the plaintiff incurred expenses. Plaintiff's parents were not keeping good health and they were under treatment. First defendant and his wife were not residing along with the parents. They were harassing the parents. Plaintiff retired from service in 1981 and he could come back to Ernakulam only in 1983 November. In 1984, plaintiff talked with the first defendant about division of the plaint schedule property. The first defendant under some pretext or other was evading the subject and on one day plaintiff casually met the original owner, who sold plaint a schedule property to plaintiff's parents. She said that a document was got registered by defendants 1 and 2 on 16-10-81 and on that day plaintiffs mother was seriously ill and the original owner of the property was sent for and when she came to the residence of the plaintiffs parents, plaintiffs mother was found seriously ill and was not able to talk freely. Plaintiff further alleged that his mother told that lady that the first defendant had threatened her with harassment and ill-treatment, if she did not do so as dictated by him. Her brother-in-law Sankara Iyer also came to the plaintiff's residence. They thought that the plaintiff's mother would take her last breath soon. Then she saw the first defendant coming to the house along with the Sub-Registrar and few others. A document was also brought by the first defendant. The first defendant then asked the lady to get the thumb impression of the plaintiff's mother. The thumb impression was just affixed and that lady was also required to sign in that document. She did not know what it was. Her brother-in-law Sankara Iyer also signed in that document. Plaintiff was not aware of further details of the documents. Though the plaintiff had visited the house, mother did not say anything about the documents for fear of the first defendant and his wife. Plaintiff with much difficuity came to know that a Will was allegedly executed by them. Plaintiff obtained a registered copy of the same and he came to know of the contents therein. Plaintiff alleged that his parents could not have voluntarily executed any such document and the alleged Will was vitiated by fraud and coercion by defendants 1 and 2. Plaintiff's parents were made to sign that document by defendants 1 and 2 without making them understand the same. Plaintiff alleged that thoug