Ratnavel Pandian, J.- Defendants 1 and 3 to 10 in O.S. No. 73 of 1969 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ramanathapuram are the appellants herein.

2. The suit was filed by the respondentsPlaintiffs for partition and separate possession of an 1/6 share in the plaint A and B schedule properties in favour of the second plaintiff on in the alternative for directing framing of a scheme for the effective management of the plaint-A schedule properties, making due provision for the participation of the second plaintiff therein and for his receiving an 1/6 share in the surplus income and also directing the division of the plaint B Schedule properties and delivering an 1/6 share therein to the second plaintiff: (2) for directing the defendants to render a true and proper account for the income derived by them from 13th June, 1967 from the plaint A schedule properties and also as regards the sale proceeds of the third item in the schedule attached to the trust settlement deed, dated 13th July, 1931 (Exhibit B-1) and for due payment of the plaintiff’s 1/6 share therein to the second plaintiff, and (3) for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from leasing out or cutting the teakwood plantations in item-1 of the A schedule properties without reference to the plaintiffs, and for costs of suit.

3. The plaint allegations may be briefly stated as follows: The plaint A schedule properties, items 1 and 2, are situate in the villages of Ayan Kollankondar and Vadakku Venganallur, Srivilliputhur Taluk, and the plaint B schedule properties are in Melapattam, Karisalkulam, Sammandapuram, Rajapalayam and Pudupalayam, Srivilliputhur taluk. The said properties belong to the families of the plaintiffs and the defendants. The common ancestor of the parties was one M. R. Subba Raja, son of Ramaswami Raja. For the purpose of better understanding of the relationship of the parties, the following genealogical tree may be usefully referred to:-

It will be found from the above that defendants 1 to 3, late Ramaswamy Raja (father of the 4th defendant), one Muthaiya Raja (adoptive father of the 5th Defendant), late Krishnama Raja (husband of the first plaintiff and adoptive father of the2nd plaintiff) and another Annama Raja were the sons of the said Subba Raja. The 6th defendant is the eldest son of the third defendant. The said Subba Raja had by Exhibit B-1 dated 13th July, 1931, a so-called trust deed, set apart the plaint A schedule items (1-A), 2 and 3 for the purposes mentioned therein, with the direction that out of the income derived from the said properties, the settlor, his sons and their descendants should perform during the month of Purattasi every year, Thirumanjanam, Sahasranama Archana and Neivedyam to Lord Venkatachalapathi Swami of Thiruvarnamalai, near Srivilliputhur, at an expense of Rs. 25 and that after the demise of the settlor and his wife Lakshmi Ammal, it should be performed at an expense of Rs. 25 per annum on each of their annual Shradha days. The balance of income from the properties after meeting the kist and other expenses, should be equally divided between all his seven sons and their descendants. The document, for this purpose, recited that the settlor should be the trustee during his lifetime and thereafter his seven sons and their male descendants should be the trustees and manage the trust by annual rotation. It was further provided that in case his sons or their male descendants did not have any male issue of their own or if any body is adopted by then outside the family, the adopted son would not have any right to the trusteeship or to any share in the surplus income. The plaintiffs submit that the said document was evidently executed only with a view to tie up the said items 1 (a) and 2 of plaint A schedule in the family in perpetuity and that the trust is an illusory one and that there was no real dedication of the properties in favour of the trust. Even on the date of the execution of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document