This is an application taken out by the first defendant in the suit seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C.

2. I have heard Mr. T.V. Ramanujun, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant and Mr.V.T.Gopalan, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs.

3. One Mr. A. Muthiah, purchased a property bearing Door No.10, old No.16, Singaram Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-17, by a sale deed dated 9-11-1933. He died intestate on 24-2-1961 leaving behind him surviving, (1) his wife Mrs.Parvatham Muthiah (2) 2 sons by name M.Gnanasambandam and M.Raja Appar and (3) 2 daughters by name Mrs.Uma Devi and Mrs. Madhuram Lakshman.

4. Mrs. Parvatham Muthiah executed a Will on 8-5-1997 registered as Document No.63/1997, in the office of the Sub-Registrar, T.Nagar, bequeathing the said property in entirety, to her 2 sons M.Gnanasambandam and M.Raja Appar. Mrs.Parvatham subsequently died on 6-12-2003. One of the daughters namely Uma Devi also died on 4-4-2005 leaving behind her surviving, her husband and 2 daughters.

5. After the death of Mrs. Parvatham, a Memorandum of Understanding was allegedly entered into between her 2 sons, her daughter Madhuram Lakshman and the legal heirs of the pre deceased daughter Uma Devi. Under the said Memorandum of Understanding dated 24-9-2005, the parties are said to have agreed to give the aforesaid property to a builder for joint development and take the constructed area that would fall to the share of the owners, in the ratio of < share each to the 2 sons and the surviving daughter of Mrs. Parvatham and < share to the legal heirs of Mrs.Uma Devi.

6. In pursuance of the Memorandum of Understanding, the parties claim to have identified a buyer and formally settled the terms of the joint development agreement on principle. But one of the 2 sons by name M. Gnanasambandam did not agree to the joint development agreement. Therefore, the other son M.Raja Appar, the surviving daughter Madhuram Lakshman and the legal heirs of the deceased daughter Uma Devi, joined together and have come up with the present suit seeking specific enforcement of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 24-9-2005. Thus, one son, one daughter and the legal heirs of the deceased daughter are the plaintiffs herein and the other son is the sole defendant herein.

.7. The prayer of the plaintiffs in the suit is as follows:-

."directing the defendant to execute the sale deed to convey < undivided share of land in the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiffs or their nominee or nominees in accordance with the memorandum of understanding dated 24-9-2005 failing which direct the officer of this court to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs"

8. While the plaintiffs instituted the present suit on 21-8-2006, the sole defendant herein instituted an independent suit in C.S.No.729 of 2006 within a few days in September 2006, praying for partition and separate possession of his 3/10 share in the suit property. His claim for 3/10 share is on the basis that after the death of the father A.Muthiah and Muthiahs mother, the property devolved upon the mother Mrs.Parvatham and 2 sons and 2 daughters in the share of 1/5 each and that the mother executed a Will dated 8-5-1997 bequeathing her 1/5 share in the suit property upon the 2 sons namely, M.Gnanasambandam (the defendant in the present suit) and M.Raja Appar (the first plaintiff in the present suit) and that therefore he was entitled to his own 1/5 share together with the 1/10 share inherited under the Will of the mother, totalling to 3/10 share. In view of such a claim based on a Will, M.Gnanasambandam has also filed O.P.No.85 of 2007 seeking Letters of Administration.

9. Thus, there are now 2 suits, one in C.S.No.701 of 2006 filed by all the other sharers against M.Gnanasambandam seeking enforcement of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 24-9-2005 and the other filed by M.Gnanasambandam against all the other sharers for partition