Ramamurti, J. - Defendants 1 to 3 have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Ramanathapuram decreeing, in favour of the plaintiff, partition and separate possession of one-fourth share in respect of certain items of properties set forth in schedule A appended to the plaint as well as the claim for mesne profits from 12th March, 1956. The plaintiff’s suit in respect of other items in the A schedule and in respect of the entire B schedule properties as well as the plaintiff’s claim for relief of accounting prior to 12th March, 1956, have been dismissed. There is no cross-appeal in respect of the portion of the plaintiff’s claim disallowed.

2. The plaintiff is the daughter of one Susai Udayar; defendants 5 and 6 are the sisters of the plaintiff, being the other daughters of Susai Udayar aforesaid. The first defendant Irudayammal is the widow of one Arokia Udayar, the son of Susai Udayar. Defendants 2, 3 and 4 are the daughters of the first defendant and Arokia Udayar aforesaid. The parties belong to Keeranur village in Ramanathapuram district and the father, Susai Udayar, left for Burma several decades ago and practically settled down there till the moment of his death in Burma in 1941. His wife, the mother of the plaintiff, also died in 1942. During the time he settled down in Burma, Susai Udayar acquired vast extent of paddy fields in Thamin Anauk Kwin, Dedaye Township in Burma. Susai Udayar also acquired lands and houses in his native village.

It is not in dispute that Susai Udayar his wife and his three daughters settled down in Burma; indeed the three daughters were born, bred up in Burma and they were also married in Burma. The husbands of the fifth and the sixth defendants (the other two daughters of Susai Udayar) were staying in Burma, looking after the lands acquired by Susai Udayar in Burma. Arokia Udayar, the son of Susai Udayar, permanently stayed in India, in the native village and used to visit Burma now and then. It was the husband of the fifth defendant (Irudayam) who was in main charge of the management of the properties in Burma and was completely assisting Susai Udayar. During the period of the war and when the conditions in Burma were chaotic between 1941 to 1946, it was the husband of the fifth defendant who was staying in Burma and managing the properties after the death of Susai Udayar. In 194,7-48, with considerable difficulty, the fifth defendant and her husband and the plaintiff returned back to India. After return from Burma, the plaintiff was staying with her brother’s wife, the first defendant. As the plaintiff had no child she was deeply attached to the fourth defendant, Therasammal, treating her as her own daughter. Misunderstandings appear to have arisen between the plaintiff and the first defendant consequent upon certain marriage proposal of the third defendant, the other daughter of the first defendant. The plaintiff issued a notice, Exhibit A-18 dated 12th March, 1956, claiming a one-fourth share in the properties of Susai Udayar, in particular, the properties in India, to which the first defendant sent a reply, Exhibit A-20 dated 29th March, 1956, in which the first defendant claimed that Susai Udayar had left behind a registered Will under which Susai Udayar had given substantial landed properties in Burma to the three daughters, 60 acres to the plaintiff, 60 acres to the sixth defendant and 35 acres to the fifth defendant and that the rest of the properties of Susai Udayar, i.e., the properties in Burma as well as those in India, were bequeathed to Susai Udayar’s son, Amkiam and that after the death of Susai Udayar in 1941, Arokiam and his three sisters were enjoying the properties as per the provisions of Will separately and in their own right and that the plaintiff was not entitled to any share in the properties in India. The plaintiff instituted the suit in forma pauperis in July, 1956, claiming partition and separate possession of her one

Click Here to Read the rest of this document