R. Mahadevan, J.

1. The unsuccessful first and third defendants in the suit and the first appeal have preferred this second appeal against the judgment and decree of the Principal District Judge, Erode in A.S No. 35 of 2005 dated 17.10.2005. The suit was filed by the son, against the first defendant father and third defendant sister claiming half share in the suit schedule properties numbering 8 items. The grandfather was shown as the second defendant and subsequent to his death, the paternal uncle was impleaded as the fourth defendant and after his death, his legal heirs have been impleaded as the fifth and sixth defendants. The purchasers of 7th item of the suit property have been impleaded as seventh and Eight defendants.

2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff claiming that the 1st to 3rd item in the suit property are ancestral property and item Nos. 4 to 8 are purchased out of the income from the ancestral property. As all the properties are joint family properties, the plaintiff has half share in the same. The further case of the plaintiff is that the settlement of 4th item of suit schedule property in favour of the 3rd defendant is null and void and so is the alienation