The appellant in both the appeals is the first defendant in a suit for specific performance directing the first defendant to execute a partition deed as per partition agreement dated 25.11.2000 and to declare the settlement deed dated 29.04.2003 executed in favour of the first defendant by his father as null and void or in the alternative to partition the suit properties into two equal shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff. The first respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit.

2. The case of the plaintiff is as follows:

The plaintiff and the first defendant are the sons of one Sri Raman Chettiar and the defendants 2 to 9 are the tenants in the suit properties. The plaintiffs father purchased the suit properties and developed the same with the contributions of the plaintiff. The first defendant never contributed any amount to purchase or develop the suit properties. The plaintiff was well placed and has a lucrative private practice and thus helped monetarily his father and the first defendant whenever required. The plaintiffs father due to his old age used to stay with the first defendant and taking such situation, the first defendant got a registered Will executed by his father in respect of the suit properties on 02.03.1999. On 09.03.1999, the first defendant also obtained power of attorney from his father. The plaintiff was not aware of the evil designs of his brother and came to know about the same only in the month of October 2000. Therefore, he approached his father and enquired about the Will. His father realized the mistake and wanted to have amicable settlement between all the parties. Accordingly, an agreement for partition dated 25.11.2000 was executed wherein the plaintiff, the first defendant and their father Raman Chettiar were the signatories. As per the said agreement for partition, the suit properties were divided into three shares. A schedule item therein was allotted to the father; B schedule therein was allotted to the plaintiff and C schedule therein was allotted to the first defendant. On the very same day, the respective sharers took possession of their respective properties and are in enjoyment of the same. The first defendant being a signatory to the said agreement is bound by the same. As per the terms of the said agreement, the parties have to effect a partition deed in future. Under the said agreement, the father also repudiated the Will executed by him in favour of the first defendant. When the plaintiff was insisted for effecting regular registered partition deed as per the terms of the agreement, though the father was willing, the first defendant was postponing the same. The plaintiffs father became old and feeble. He was suffering with several health problems and required constant medical care. Therefore, he was staying with the plaintiff. However, the first defendant with evil intention, had taken the father from the custody of the plaintiff and by way of threat and compulsion, got a settlement deed dated 29.04.2003, executed by him in his favour with regard to the entire suit properties. The said settlement deed executed and registered was under force, fraud and undue influence. Therefore, the said settlement deed is illegal, null and void, not enforceable and not binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiffs father died on 07.05.2003 under mysterious circumstances. His death was due to complete negligence of medical attention and harsh treatment. After executing an agreement for partition, dated 25.11.2000, by throwing the property into the joint family, also by repudiating Will dated 02.03.1999 and after giving possession of the suit properties to the respective sharers, the father had no right to execute the settlement deed dated 29.04.2003. The first defendant is also estopped from creating and claiming right under the settlement deed. The plaintiff being the elder brother, tried for amicable settlement with the first defendant. But the efforts proved futile. Therefor