Ramaswami, J.- The second defendant is the appellant. The first respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for partition and allotment of 1/3 share in the suit properties which consisted of six schedules. The suit was decreed only in respect of the plaint A schedule properties and even in respect of the same the plaintiff was held to be entitled only to a ¼share and not 1/3 share as claimed in the plaint The suit in respect of the properties mentioned in the other schedules was dismissed. Since in this appeal by the second defendant, the decree granted in favour of the plaintiff in respect of item 1 of the plaint A schedule alone is disputed, we need notice only the facts relating to that item and the respective contentions of the parties.

2. The plaintiff, defendants 1 and 2 and one Chockalingam Pillai are the sons of one Arthanatha Pillai through his third wife. He had a son by name Soundararajan by his first wife and another son by name Mathuranayagam by his second wife. On 22nd August, 1921 (Exhibit B-52), item-1 of the plaint A-schedule was purchased in the name of Nagammal, the third wife of Arthanatha Pillai. Arthanatha Pillai executed a Will (Exhibit A-1) dated 13th July, 1927, and d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document