Plea of estoppel cannot be taken in absence of knowledge about the contents of the deed.

P. Shanmugam, J.

1. The defendants in O.S.No.50 of 1983 are the appellants in A.S.No. 441 of 1986 and A.S.No.977 of 1994. The plaintiff in O.S.No.9 of 1984 is the appellant in Tr.A.S.No.756 of 1988.

2 . The suit for partition and separate possession, O.S. No.50 of 1983 was decreed and final decree was passed, against which two appeals, viz . A.S. Nos.441 of 1986 and 977 of 1994 are preferred by the defendants in the said suit. The suit for a declaration of title and for permanent injunction, O.S. No.9 of 1984 was dismissed, against which the other appeal, viz. Tr. A.S. No.756 of 1988 is preferred by the plaintiff in the said suit.

3. The genealogy of the members of the family is shown hereunder :

4. The Particulars of the appeals before us are given below:

5. The facts of the case are stated below. The parties are described as per their rankings in O.S. No.50 of 1983.

6. Devanna Gounder was the Village Munsif of Mooppanankurichi Village and Venjamangudalur East Village till he died on 6.11.1930. He left behind his wife Arukkani Ammal and two sons and Karundevi Gounder. The dispute is between these two sons and their legal representatives. After the death of Devanna Gounder, Palanisamy Goundar, the eldest member of the family continued to be the Village Munsif till he died in the year 1974.

7. The case of the plaintiffs is that Devanna Gounder owned ancestral properties and from out of that nucleus, the suit properties were purchased and therefore, they are entitled for a partition. Whereas, the case of the first defendant is that there was no ancestral properties and that the suit properties were purchased by Palanisamy Gounder from his own source and he has acquired title to the suit properties by virtue of the Settlement made by Arukkani Ammal and the Release made by Karundevi Gounder .

8. The further case of the plaintiffs is that Devanna Gounder owned ancestral properties at Mooppanankurichi Village and Venjamangudalur East Village and that they were jointly sold by Palanisamy Gounder, Karundevi Gounder and their minor sons under Exhibits A.1 to A.6 between 1950 and 1957. The total extent of the properties sold was approximately 16 acres. By utilizing the sale proceeds from Exs.A.l to A.6, Arukkani Ammal purchased properties covered by Exs.A.7 to A.13. Similarly, the properties under Exs.A.16 to A.27 were purchased in the name of Palanisamy Gounder by utilizing the proceeds of the earlier sales of the joint family properties. By Exs.A.14 and A.15, properties were purchased in the name of Poornammal, wife of Palanisamy Gounder. By Ex.A.28, properties were purchased in the name of Karundevi Gounder, the father of plaintiffs 1 and 2. The first defendant purchased the properties covered by Ex.A.239/8.26. Exs.A.30 and A.31 are the sale deeds standing in the name of the third defendant, the wife of the first defendant.

9. The specific case of the plaintiffs is that the entire properties that were purchased in the names of the defendants as well as in the name of the third plaintiff and her husband Karundevi Gounder are joint family properties and that they were in possession of the properties in joint enjoyment. According to them, there was no division of the joint family properties at any point of time. There are three houses in Nandanur and Seelamanickanur villages. The defendants are in possession and enjoyment of the house at Seelamanickanur village and the plaintiffs are in possession and enjoyment of the house at Nandanur. The third house was used by the first defendant for his office as the Village Munsif. The further case of the plaintiffs is that after the death of Devanna Gounder, Arukkani Ammal was managing the properties since her two sons namely Palanisamy Gounder and Karundevi Gounder were too young. After attaining majority, Palanisamy Gounder became the Village Munsif, succeeding his father and he was the manager of the joint family. After the death of Palanisamy Gounder in the year 1974, the