1. This appeal is focussed at the instance of the defendants as against the judgment and decree dated 310. 2000 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Panruti, in the suit in O.S.No.67 of 1996, which was filed by the plaintiffs as against the defendants for partition and for other consequential reliefs.

2. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

3. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely, the case of the plaintiffs as stood exposited from the averments in the plaint could be recounted thus:

.(a) One Narayanan had two wives, namely, Kullammal and Pooraniammal. Through his first wife, Kullammal he had two children, viz., deceased Varadan and Sampoornam-the fifth plaintiff. Varadans wife is Andal-the fourth plaintiff. The children of Varadan and Andal are Radhakrishnan, Balakrishnan, and Neelakanni (Plaintiffs 1 to 3).

.(b) The said Narayanan through his second wife Pooraniammal gave birth to four children viz., Mayavan, Perumal, Jeyabalan and Meenakumari- D2 to D5 respectively.

.(c) Even though in the genealogy appended to the plaint, the plaintiffs set out that Narayanan had t