The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S.No.313/2007 on the file of the court of the First Additional District Judge, Erode are the appellants in the Appeal Suit.

2. The above said suit was filed by the appellants herein against the respondents for the following reliefs: (1) a declaration that the Partnership Dissolution Deed dated 11.12.1985 entered into by the appellants/plaintiffs 1 and 2, respondents 1 to 5/defendants 1 to 5 and late V.S.Thangavel is true, valid and binding on the respondents/defendants; (2) a consequential permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from in any manner interfering with the suit property either by creating encumbrance or by making any alienation or otherwise; (3) a permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from trespassing into any portion of the suit property; (4) a permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from in any way altering the physical features of the suit property either by putting up constructions or otherwise; and (5) for a direction against the respondents/defendants to pay the costs of the appellants/plaintiffs.

3. After the trial, the learned trial Judge, based on the consideration of evidence adduced on both sides in the light of the arguments advanced on behalf of both, dismissed the above said suit by a judgment and decree dated 07.12.2009. Aggrieved by and challenging the said decree of the trial court dated 07.12.2009 dismissing O.S.No.313/2007 on the file of the First Additional District Judge, Erode, the present appeal has been filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4. For the sake of convenience and in order to avoid confusion, the parties are referred to in accordance with their ranks in the suit and at appropriate places, wherever it becomes necessary, their ranks in the Appeal suit also shall be furnished.

5. The appellants herein/plaintiffs filed the above said suit for the above said reliefs, based on the plaint averments, which can be concisely stated, as follows:

i) Late V.S.Thangavel got a Madras terraced building with a ground floor and first floor bearing old Door Nos.158/B and 727 to 730, that were later on changed as Door No.426 at Brough Road, Erode, comprised in old T.S.No.276/3 and new T.S.No.98, under a registered Partition Deed 12.12.1953. Subsequently, he died intestate on 12.12.1994 leaving behind him defendants 1 to 5 and his wife Pankajam as his legal heirs. The said Pankajam also died intestate on 20.12.2006. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 along with late V.S.Thangavel and defendants 1 to 5 started a partnership business in the name and type of “Marappan Commercial Complex” under a registered Partnership Deed dated 12.08.1995. The sons of V.S.Thangavel, namely defendants 1 to 5 became partners in the said partnership business along with their father late V.S.Thangavel. Each one of the plaintiffs contributed Rs.1,00,000/-towards their respective shares of the share capital. Late V.S.Thangavel and defendants 1 to 5, who did not have cash with them to pay towards their contribution, brought the suit property, described fully in the plaint schedule, towards their share capital. The object of the partnership firm was to do Real Estate business by buying and selling properties and putting up constructions. As difference of opinion arose between the partners and since the tenants also did not vacate and hand over the portions in their occupation, the partnership firm was a non-starter and hence all the partners decided to dissolve the partnership. At that point of time V.S.Thangavel and the defendants 1 to 5 wanted the building to be valued and the accounts to be settled. The suit property together with building was valued at Rs.6,00,000/-and it was mutually agreed that the plaintiffs would take the property and the other partners, namely V.S.Thangavel and defendants 1 to 5 should get Rs.1,00,000/-fro