In a suit for partition, the plaintiffs must prove their legitimacy and possession of the suit properties in order to succeed.

1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1388 of 1980 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dindigul, are the appellants. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs for partition of plaintiffs 17/18 shares in the suit properties. The plaintiffs case is as follows:—

The suit property comprised in S. No. 1029/2 situate in the Village of Ayyampalayam of an extent of 4.14 acres belonged to Palaniyandi Nattanmai. Muthuveera Nattanmai, Subbiah Nattanmai and Nallathambi Nattanmai are his sons. Valliammal is the wife of Muthuveera Nattanmai. Valliammal and Muthuveera Nattanmai died issueless. The second son of Palaniyandi Nattanmai namely, Subbiah Nattanmai had four wives. They are Achammal, Pappammal, Ochammal and Vadamalai Ayee, the first defendant in the suit. Mounagurusamy, father of the second plaintiff and Palaniyandi, the third plaintiff are sons born to Subbiah Nattanmai and Ochammal. The other two wives Achammal and Pappammal had no issues. The first plaintiff is the son of Nallathambi Nattanmai. On the death of the sons of Palaniyandi Nattanmai, the plaintiffs and the first defendant were in joint possession of the suit properties. As the first defendant was the eldest member of the family, patta was transferred to her name and she has been paying the kist and managing the property. The parties lived under the same roof and only recently the first defendant began to live separately. There is also a Samathi of Subbiah Nattanmai in the portion of the suit property. The first plaintiff has 9/18 shares while plaintiffs 2 and 3 each entitled to 4/18 shares and the remaining one share belongs to the first defendant. The first defendant is attempting to dispose of the property taking advantage of the fact that title deeds are in her favour. A notice was also issued to which she had not sent any reply. The suit property has been sold to the second defendant. Hence he is impleaded in the suit. As the second defendant had applied for the lay-out of the suit property to the third defendant, he is also added as the defendant.

2. The third defendant remained absent and was set ex parte .

3. Defendants 1 and 2 filed a written statement pleading as follows:—

The plaintiffs have no share in the suit property. The paternity of the plaintiffs is questioned by the defendants. Subbiah Nattanmai married only the first defendant and had no other wives. The three brothers, namely, Muthuveera Nattanmai, Subbiah Nattanmai and Nallathambi Nattanmai divided their properties long ago, and the suit property came to the share of Subbiah Nattanmai and Nallathambi Nattanmai. Nallathambi Nattanmai sold a portion of the property allotted to him to Subbiah Nattanmai in 1925. The first defendant purchased the same property in the year 1934. Nallathambi Nattanmai sold away the remaining portion in the year 1948. Thus, she has become the absolue owner of the property. She is in undisturbed possession of the property. One Subban Chettiar obtained a decree in S.C. No. 366 of 1931 against Subbiah Nattanmai and brought part of the property for sale in execution proceedings. The first defendant preferred a claim and it was dismissed. Later she filed a suit and obtained a decree. The first plaintiff is not the legitimate son of Nallathambi Nattanmai. The plaintiffs and the first defendant were never in joint possession of the suit property. As the person absolutely entitled to the property, the first dependant is entitled to execute a sale. Accordingly, she sold the property in favour of the second defendant for valuable consideration, excluding 14 cents wherein the samathi of her husband is situate. After the sale, the second defendant is in possession. Even otherwise, she prescribed title to the suit property by-adverse possession. The suit is not maintainable.

4. An additional written statement was filed by defendants 1 and 2 containing the following averments:—

The properties were partitioned even before 1917. One Vellayammal, the wife of common ancestor Palaniyandi was