In S.A.(MD)No.31 of 1997, the defendant is the appellant. The appeal is preferred against the decree and judgment in A.S.No.149/1997, confirming the decree and judgment in O.S.No.230 of 1996, which is filed for permanent injunction.

2. In S.A.(MD)No.759 of 1997 is filed by the sole plaintiff against the decree and judgment in A.S.No.126 of 1993, partially allowing the appeal as against the decree and judgment in O.S.No.214 of 1991, which was filed for partition of 1/6 share of the plaintiff along with his brothers and sisters.

3. Though both the Second Appeals are arising out of two different judgments in A.S.Nos.124 & 126/1993, since the parties are same and the issues and suit properties involved are one and the same, the appeals are taken up together for hearing and a common judgment is delivered.

4. The brief facts of the case leading to filing of injunction suit and a partition suit between the two brothers and sisters are as follows:-

The Plaintiff in O.S.No.214 of 1991 and in O.S.No.230 of 1996 is one Sambandam, the younger brother of the first defendant in O.S.No.214 of 1991 and the sole defendant in O.S.No.230 of 1996. The dispute relates to the II schedule of