The first defendant proved the Will executed by Veerappa Gounder under Ex.B.1, and the court found no oral partition between Veerappa Gounder and the first defendant, and that the Ex.B.2 partition deed dated 14.04.1972 stood proved.

The plaintiffs 1 to 4 in O.S.No.70 of 1988 are the appellants in A.S.No.600 of 1992. The said suit was filed for a declaration that an amount of Rs.13993.88 being the price of sugarcane lying with the third defendant is belonging to the plaintiffs or in the alternative for a decree of partition and allotment of 4/10th share, apart from declaring that the item 2 of the suit property belonging to the plaintiffs or in the alternative granting 4/10th share and for a permanent injunction against the defendants 1 and 2 from carrying on agricultural operation alternatively praying for the decree of partition and allotment of 4/10th share to the plaintiffs in the suit properties.

2. Among the plaintiffs in the suit, the first plaintiff is the mother and other plaintiffs are her daughters. The first defendant is the son of the first plaintiff and the brother of the other plaintiffs and the second defendant is the wife of the first defendant. It is also now admitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants across the bar that the appellants 1 to 3, who were plaintiffs 1 to 3 in the suit, have joined with the respondents 1 and 2, namely, the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit and only the 4th defendant who is the 4th appellant is conducting the proceedings.

.3. The case of the plaintiffs in the suit is that there are 6 items of properties out of which the first item is relating to the amount of Rs.13,993.88 pending with the third defendant and the second item consisting of value of 6 shares at Rs.4,000/- given by the third defendant in favour of the first plaintiffs husband Late Veerappa Gounder and others are landed properties. The case of the plaintiffs is that the husband of the first plaintiff and the father of the other plaintiff and the first defendant Veerappa Gounder, died on 08.05.1987. Even during his lifetime he has orally partitioned the properties between himself and the first defendant and they were doing agricultural operations separately by supplying sugarcane to the third defendant mill. The first plaintiff’s husband during his lifetime has executed a will dated 212. 1986 bequeathing his properties in favour of the first plaintiff during her life time and thereafter to be absolutely taken by the other plaintiffs 2 to 4. After the death of the husband, the first plaintiff has supplied 60 tones of sugarcane to the third defendant at the rate of Rs.237.50 and the plaintiffs are entitled for the remaining amount.

4. It is the case of the plaintiffs that even if it is held that there was no oral partition between Veerappa Gounder and the first defendant, the plaintiffs are entitled for partition and also entitled for the share as per the Will of Veerappa Gounder. It is also the further case of the plaintiffs that even if the Court comes to the conclusion that the Will of Veerappa Gounder is not proved, as per the Hindu Succession Act, the plaintiffs are entitled for 4/10th share and the defendants are entitled for 6/10th share in the suit properties.

5. The first defendant has filed the written statement. While admitting the relationship between the parties, the first defendant denies the allegation of oral partition between Veerappa Gounder and the first defendant. According to the first defendant, the said Veerappa Gounder and himself were enjoying the specified portions for convenient purposes and they formed part of the Hindu Undivided Joint Family till the death of Veerappa Gounder. According to the first defendant, his father Veerappa Gounder along with his brother by name Palaniyandy and his two sons Kaliyannan and Veerappan, apart from the said Veerappa Gounder’s father Muthu Veerappa Gounder and the said Veerappa Gounder’s mother Karupayee have divided the properties under a registered partition deed on 14.04.1972. In the said partition deed, the first defendant as well as his father Veerappa Gounder were parties and they were allotted jointly A Schedule properties in the said partition