JUDGEMENT :- The first defendant in the suit has filed the present second appeal. The first respondent herein, as the plaintiff, has filed the suit for partition and possession. The first defendant/appellant herein has defended the suit on various grounds, including ouster in respect of right of using a well. The first defendant has also filed his additional written statement to the effect that the suit is bad for partial partition for the reason that when the plaintiff in his evidence has admitted that the jewel called "Kasu Malai" being 15 sovereigns was available, which was the subject-matter of a panchayat, the non-inclusion of such a valuable jewel belonging to the family will be fatal to the suit for partition. The trial Court, having held that in the third item of the suit property, namely the well, the plaintiff has a right of partition since he is deemed to have been in constructive possession thereof, came to the conclusion that the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief sought for on the basis that he failed to include 15 sovereigns of "Kasu Malai" in the schedule of properties and dismissed the suit. However, the first appellate Court has reversed the said judgement on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document