Judgment.-This suit relates to the succession to the properties of one Thiruvengada Nayakar who died on the 21st March, 1945. The plaintiff claims as his divided brother on the ground that the deceased did not leave any nearer heir like widow or child. The first defendant claims to be the second wife of the deceased and defendants 2 and 3 claim to be the son and the daughter respectively of the deceased by the first defendant. The defendants put forward an alternative case that even if the first defendant was not the lawfully married wife of the deceased, she was in any event his permanently kept concubine and the second defendant was the son born to the deceased by the first defendant and therefore as an illegitimate son he would be entitled to succeed to his putative father. It is obvious that the plaintiff’s suit must fail if either case of the defendants is established.

Issues 1 to 4 raise questions which are really necessary for the disposal of the suit. Issues 1 and 2 relate to the plea of a lawful marriage set up by the defendants while issue 3 relates to the case of exclusive concubinage set up by them.

The undisputed facts are as follows. Sometime in 1922 there was a partiti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document