1. Challenging the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.12 of 2011, on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Karur, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 987 of 2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Karur, the plaintiffs have filed the above Second Appeal.

2. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.987 of 2005 to declare the registered sale deed dated 03.01.1994 in respect of the suit property executed by the defendants 1 to 5 in favour of the sixth defendant is null and void and consequently, directing the sixth defendant to surrender the possession of the suit property to the plaintiffs 3 to 6.

3. The brief case of the plaintiffs is as follows:

(i) According to the plaintiffs, the suit property is the selfacquired property of one Late Nallianna Goundar. The first defendant is the wife of the said Nallianna Goundar. The defendants 2 to 4 are his daughters and the fifth defendant is his son. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the daughters of the fifth defendant. On 23.09.1991, Nallianna Goundar and the first defendant executed a registered Will in favour of the plaintiffs 1 and 2. The said Will was duly executed and attested by the witnesses. The said Nallianna Goundar died on 02.12.1991. After his death, the Will came into effect, hence, the plaintiffs 1 and 2 have become absolute owners to the properties including the suit property. The first defendant – the other testator of the Will cancelled the Will on 11.12.1992 by a cancellation deed. According to the plaintiffs, the first defendant is not entitled to cancel the Will in respect of the properties belonging to Nallianna Goundar. To defeat and defraud the plaintiffs 1 and 2, the defendant 1 to 5 have executed a registered sale deed on 03.01.1994 and the sold the property to the sixth defendant. In the sale deed, it has been recited that the fifth defendant was representing on behalf of the plaintiffs 1 and 2. But the fifth defendant has adverse interest against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs 3 to 6 have purchased the entire suit properties from the plaintiffs 1 and 2 for a valuable consideration on 28.01.2008. Therefore, the registered sale deed dated 03.01.1994 executed in favour of the sixth defendant is to be declared as null and void and the sixth defendant is to be directed to surrender the possession of the suit property to the plaintiffs 3 to 6.

(ii) On 21.09.1967 recognizing the possession of Nallianna Goundar and Sellappa Goundar, ryatwari patta was given to them. Subsequently, Nallianna Goundar and Sellappa Goundar have orally divided the property and the suit property was allotted to Nallianna Goundar. Since the suit property is the self-acquired property of Nallianna Goundar, the first defendant - his wife cannot claim any right over the suit property. On 28.01.2008, the plaintiffs 1 and 2 have sold the plaint schedule property to the plaintiffs 3 to 6 for valuable consideration.

4. The brief case of the sixth defendant is as follows:

(i) According to the sixth defendant, the suit property is not the self-acquired property of Nallianna Goundar. S.F.No.8 corresponds to old S.F.No.335. It comprises an extent of 9 acres 72 cents. Originally, a grant was given to one Dhasi Ammani to this land for performing dance at the time of festivals in Karur Pasupatheeswaraswamy temple. She was given the property for dancing services. Later the grant was enfranchised and ryatwari Patta was given to her and she became the absolute owner of the property. From the date of grant, Dhasi Ammani was in possession and enjoyment of SF No.8. After the death of Dhasi Ammani, her two daughters have orally partitioned the property and southern half was retained by one daughter and the northern half was retained by another daughter. The suit property is the northern half. Kaliammal - the first defendant, who was the successor of one of the daughters of Dhasi Ammani, became entitled to the suit property. The execution of the registered Will by the fir