1. This second appeal is focussed by the defendants, inveighing the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2012 passed by the learned Principal Judge, city Civil Court, Chennai in A.S.No.110 of 2012 confirming the judgment and decree dated 23.11.2011 passed by the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.4726 of 2010.

2. The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

3. A resume of facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this second appeal would run thus:

a] The plaintiffs, filed the suit for partition, seeking the following reliefs: To pass a decree

(i) declaring that each of the plaintiffs are entitled to 1/6th share in the schedule "A" and "B" mentioned properties.

(ii) to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to divide the suit property by metes and bounds into six shares for allotting 1/6th share to the 1st plaintiff and 1/6th share to the second plaintiff and pass final decree.

(iii) to direct the fourth defendant to account for the income of the schedule mentioned property from the date of plaint.

(extracted as such)

in respect of the two items of properties described here under:

A Schedule Premises bearing Door No.65/1, Thiruvengadapuram First Street, Choolaimedu Chennai 600 094, S.No.17/4 (Part) admeasuring to an extent of 604 sq.ft bounded on the

North by : 1st plaintiff's property South by : Velu Naicker House

East by : Gnanaprakasam Property and

West by: George's property (1st defendant)

situated within the SRO Kodambakkam and Registration District of Chennai.

B SCHEDULE

Premises bearing Door No.51, (Plot No.43), Pushpa Nagar, 2nd Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034, bearing R.S.No.576 and 577 (part) extent of 84 sq.metre.

North by : Pushpa Nagar 1st street

South by : R.S.No.877

East by : Plot No.44 and

West by : Plot No.42

situated within Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk.

(extracted as such)

b] Precisely and pithily, the case of the plaintiffs' is that the plaintiffs' mother Catherine owned the suit properties. The plaintiffs and the defendants are the daughters and sons of Savariappan and the said Cathrine. Savariappan pre-deceased Cathrine and Cathrine died intestate on 23.09.2003 leaving the plaintiffs and the defendants as her legal heirs. Out of total extent of the plot measuring 1744 sq.ft., Cathrine during her life time settled an extent of 300 sq.ft in favour of the first plaintiff Alphonse Rani. The same Cathrine sold an extent of 840 sq.ft out of the remaining extent of 1444 sq.ft to her son George, the first defendant herein by registered sale deed dated 20.10.1989 and the remaining extent of 604 sq.ft described as first item of the suit property was in her possession. The second item described in the schedule of the plaint was allotted in favour of the said Cathrine under lease cum Sale agreement dated 23.04.1990 by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board and till her death no sale deed was executed by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board in her favour and except that all other formalities were completed in favour of Cathrine.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs prayed for dividing the extent of 604 sq.ft in the first item of the suit properties and the entire second item of the suit properties into six shares and allot their aliquot shares.

c] Per contra, denying and refuting the allegations/averments in the plaint, the third defendant filed the written statement, which was adopted by D1, D2 and D4, the gist and kernel of it would run thus:

The relationship as found set out in the plaint is true. The first plaintiff as per her own version got from Cathrine 300 sq.ft vide settlement deed dated 21.05.1983. Cathrine during her life time itself after such settlement declared that the first plaintiff was no more entitled to any extent in the first item of the suit properties and according to the wish and will of Cathrine, the extent of 604 sq.ft described in the first item of the suit prop