M. KARPAGAVINAYAGAM, J.

( 1 ) THE appellants! A-1 and A-2 have filed this appeal, challenging the Judgment in S.

C. No. i20 of 1986 on the file of the II Additional Sessions, -Judge. Trichy, convicting the appellants for the offences under Section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. , (two counts), and Section 324 read with 34 I. P. C. and sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment for each count under Section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. and to undergo RI, for two years for the offence under Section 324 read with 34 I. P. C. while convicting and sentencing the i st appellant for the offence under Section 324 read with Sii I. P. C. also to undergo RI, for one year. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

( 2 ) THE accusation against the accused! appellants is that on 14-3 i986 at about ii. 00

A. M. at Sundankudi Thattankurichi village, Ariyalur Taluk. A-1, the first appellant herein by means of a bala-knife (M. O. i) on being handed over by A-2, attacked the is deceased (D-1) Chandrakasan by cutting on the back side of his head, stabbed on the 2nd deceased (D-2) Karuppaiah, on his left forearm, left leg and abdomen, caused injuries on P. W. 2 Chellakkannu on his right leg and also attempted to attack P. W. i Govindaraj, as a result of which D-1 and D-2 fell down and died at the spot and P. W. 2 sustained simple injuries.

( 3 ) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows: (a) The appellants are brothers. D-1 Chandrakasan and P. W. 2 Chellakkannu are the brothers of P. W. i Govindaraj. D-2 Karuppaiah is the paternal uncles son of P. W. 1. P. W. 5 Pitchai Moopanar is a paternal uncle of P. Ws, 1 and 2. The appellants are pangaalis of P. Ws. i and 2. Both the appellants and the prosecution parties hail from the same village called Sundakudi. Both the parties have got their own lands at Thattaankuzhi village situate at the eastern side of the house of the prosecution parties. (b) P. W. 5 Pitchai Moopanar married one Saradam as his third wife, since his other two wives had no issues out of the said wedlock. Saradam gave birth to three children, In the course of time. A-1 had developed illicit intimacy with the said Saradam. When this was known to the villagers, A-1 was called and severely warned by P. Ws. i, 2 and others. (c) P. W. 5 getting angry over the affairs of the said Saradam with A-1, beat her one day. On knowing this, A-1 abused P. W. 5 and threatened him by saying that if he would further beat her, he would kill him. Then P. W. 5 informed this incident to P. Ws. 1, 2, D i and D-2. Thereafter, P. Ws. i and 2 went to A-1 and asked him to sever his connection with the said Saradam.

But A-1 did not care. (d) P. W. 5 gave a complaint against A-1 with reference to this incident in Keelappalur police station. P-W. 12 Rengaraj, the Head Constable, after receiving the complaint EX. P. 3 from P. W. 5, called both the parties and warned A-1, not to have any more connection with the wife of P. W. 5, EX. P. 4 is the compromise muchalika, written by both the parties in the police station. (e) Thereafter P. W. 5 fearing that his life was at stake and expecting danger at the hands of A-1, settled his property in favour of D-2 Karuppaiah, his brothers son, in order to enable him to take care of his three children, after his life time. This also created a grudge in the mind of A-1. In retaliation to this, A-1, through the said Saradam arranged to send legal notice to P. W. 5, objecting to the above settlement. In this background, the fateful occurrence had taken place on 143- i986. (f) P. W. 3 Selvam is the son of P. W. 1 Govindarajan. In the early morning of 14-3-1986, at about 7. 30 A. M. Di, D2 and P. W. 2 went to their respective fields at Thattankurichi village for ploughing. P. W. 1 also went to his field for cutting the bund. P. W. 3 Selvam, who also went along with P. W. i was grazing the cattle near the field of the appellants. D-2 Karuppaiah also grazing his cattle in his field at that time. (g) At