Ramaswami, J.-One Panju Sastrigal of Pavattakudi village, Nannilam Taluk had two sons by name Ramaswami and Sambamoorthy, the 1st plaintiff herein. Sambamoorthy was adopted by one Ananthanarayana Iyer in or about the year 1890. Subsequent to the adoption, Sambamoorthy was married to one Ponnammal. Sambamoorthy had a son Halasyam and daughter Laxmi, the 2nd plaintiff in the suit. Halasyam died on 3rd July, 1961 and the 1st defendant is his widow. Defendants 2 to 5 in the suit are the tenants in possession of the suit properties. Pending the suit the 1st plaintiff Sambamoorthy died on 13th July, 1962 and his daughter, the 2nd plaintiff was brought or record as his legal representative.

2. The plaint A Schedule properties are pannai lands of an extent of 5 acres 24 1/3 cents. Schedules B to B-3 are lands under tenancy with defendants 2 to 5 and measure an extent of 7 acres 58 2/3 cents. The B schedule are two houses in Pavattakudi village and the C schedule relates to movables and cattle. The A schedule pannai lands were in possession and cultivation of the 1st plaintiff’s son Halasyam till his death on 3rd July, 1961 and thereafter continued to be in possession and cultivation of the 1st defendant. The D schedule houses are also in possession of the 1st defendant. After the adoption sometime between 1896 and 1902 Sambamoorthy left the village for Madras. He was doing sweet-meat sales business originally as an assistant, then as a partner with one Subramania Iyer and later he purchased the partnership business itself and became its sole proprietor. Out of the earnings from this business the 1st plaintiff purchased the suit properties and a number of other items of properties; some items had been disposed of by him and an extent of 4 acres 28 cents of nanja land apart from the suit properties were also stated to be in the possession of the 1st plaintiff through his tenants. He had also purchased a house in Mayavaram which was in his occupation till his death. After his death the 2nd plaintiff got into possession of these 4 acres 28 cents and the house in Mayavaram.

3. It is the case of Sambamoorthy that the suit properties and others are his self-acquired properties, that he did not get any immovable properties or cash or any other property either from his natural father or his adoptive father or from anybody else, that he saved substantially when he was assisting in various sweetmeat stalls and that with that money he became a partner with Subramania Iyer. With the earnings from that business he was able to purchase the other partner’s share and became the sole proprietor of the business. All the suit properties were acquired out of the income from this sweet-meat business during the period between 1910 and 1925 when the 1st plaintiff’s son Halasyam was just a minor he having been born only in 1910. By has last will and testament dated 27th August, 1961, Sambamoorthy had bequeathed all his properties to his daughter, the 2nd plaintiff, after the death of his son Halasyam. On these allegations he had filed the suit for possession of the suit immovable and movable properties and for mesne profits.

4. In the written statement filed by the ist defendant she contended that the adoptive father had considerable immovable properties and cash and the adoption itself was made with a view to secure these properties. There were also ancestral properties belonging to the natural father in which Sambamoorthy was also given a share.

5. The 1st plaintiff while young invested his ancestral funds and became a partner in a sweet-meat shop run at Madras and a little later purchased the other share in the partnership also with the ancestral funds. With the income from the the business the suit properties were purchased and the plaint schedule properties and the house in Mayavaram and the 4 acres 28 cents which are in possession of the 2nd plaintiff are all joint family properties in which Halasyam, the husband of the 1st defendant had an equal share. She

Click Here to Read the rest of this document