The 16th defendant in O.S.No.20 of 1986 on the file of the District Judge, Karaikal is the appellant in A.S.No.927 of 1989. Defendants 2 to 5, 7 to 9, 14 and 15 in the said suit are the appellants in A.S.No.141 of 1990. The plaintiffs in the suit are the cross objectors in Cross Objection No.137 of 1995. The parties are referred to as per their ranks in the Trial Court.

2. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.20 of 1986 filed the suit for partition of their 31/45 share and the Trial Court passed the preliminary decree declaring that the plaintiffs are entitled to 31/45 share and also held that the 16th defendant viz., the appellant in A.S.No.927 of 1989 has no right in the suit property and eviction proceedings can be initiated against her for evicting her by instituting separate proceedings. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the 16th defendant filed A.S.No.927 of 1989 and defendants 2 to 5, 7 to 9, 14 and 15 filed A.S.No.141 of 1990.

3. The case of the plaintiffs as seen from the plaint is as follows:-

The house property mentioned in the schedule originally belonged to one Oli Sahib Maricar and Julaiga Ummal and they got the property under a sale deed dated 25.5.1911 and both of them died intestate leaving behind three sons and three daughters and under the Muslim Law, the sons got 10/45 share each and daughters got 5/45 share each. The first son by name Shaik Mohamed Maricar died and was survived by his children Mohamed Abdul Kader, Abdul Razack, Mohamed Ibrahim, Abdul Samed, Hawva Bee and Kathija Bee and all of them executed a power of attorney in favour of one Abdul Razack to sell their respective shares in the suit property and under a registered sale deed dated 3.7.1967, the power agent Abdul Razak sold the share of the said Shaik Mohamed viz., 10/45 share to the first plaintiff for a valuable consideration. One of the daughters viz., Kadiza Ummal sold her 5/45 share to her own brother Abdul Khader on 14.3.1946 under a registered sale deed and therefore, Abdul Khader got 10/45 share by inheritance and 5/45 share through sale. The said Abdul Khader died intestate leaving behind Sheik Mohammed Maraikair, Abdul Rahim and Fathima Jayanambu Gani and they disposed of the share held by Abdul Khader viz., 15/45 share to the second plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 20.10.1970. Another daughter by name Aysha Ummal died intestate and her legal heirs Mohamed Abdul Khader, Mohammed Ibrahim, Fathima Sultan and Jayambu Ganu have sold their respective shares viz., 5/45 share to the first plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 10.7.1968. Another daughter by name Maimoon Ummal died leaving behind her children viz., T.A.Hmeed Maricar, T.A.Sultan Maricar and Fathima Ummal and among them, Fathima Ummal became entitled to 1/45 share and she sold the same to the first plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 21.11.1973 and thus, the first plaintiff became the absolute owner of 16/45 share and the second plaintiff became the absolute owner of 15/45 share in the suit property and they are in possession of their respective shares.

4. Defendants 1 and 2, who are the legal heirs of Maimoon Ummal, who was the daughter of Oli Sahib Maricar, are in possession of 2/45 share each. The other son of Oli Sahib Maricar viz., Meera Labbai Maricar died and survived by defendants 3 to 9 and two daughters viz., Nabeesa Ummal and Hajia Gani. Nabeesa Ummal died leaving behind defendants 10 to 12 as her legal heirs and Hajia Gani also died leaving behind defendants 13 to 15 as her legal heirs. Therefore, the 10/45 share of Meera Labbai Maricar devolved upon defendants 3 to 15. The 16th defendant was inducted as a tenant. Therefore, the suit was filed for partition of plaintiff's 31/45 share in the suit property.

5. The third defendant filed a statement and the same was adopted by defendants 2, 4 to 12, 14 and 15. The case of the third defendant was that the suit property is a wakf property and it has been considered as such by late Oli Sahib Ma