The appellants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff, lost before the Courts below and assailing the concurrent findings recorded by it, have filed this Second Appeal.

2. Facts briefly narrated and necessary for the disposal of this Second Appeal are as follows:

2.1. One T.S.Annamalai, Son of late T.V.Srinivasa Pillai, filed the Suit in O.S.No.360 of 1995 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge at Tiruvallur, against his mother-first defendant, second defendant-younger brother, third defendant-wife of the second defendant and the defendants 4 to 7, their children, eight and ninth defendants- subsequent alienees, praying for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff's = share in the Suit schedule properties and for mesne profits @ Rs.2000/- per year from 1992 to till the date of filing of the Suit and normal future profit @ Rs.2,000/- per year and for appointment of Advocate Commissioner and also for allotment of share to the plaintiff.

2.2. The plaintiff, pending disposal of the Suit, died on 09.08.2009 and his legal representatives/plaintiffs 2 to 6 were added and they prosecuted the Suit. The averments in the plaint read among other things that the father of the plaintiff and the second defendant and the husband of the first defendant, namely T.V.Srinivasa Pillai died in the year 1945, leaving behind them as legal heirs. The plaintiff and the second defendant eked out their livelihood by preparing and selling eatables at Thozhur Village. The plaintiff was appointed as Village Karnam in the year 1953 and out of income earned, started supporting the family and also earned income as Document Writer. In the year 1958, the plaintiff was appointed as a School Teacher and he retired from service in January 1993 and thus, he had sufficient income and out of the savings, began to purchase land and properties, while the family remained jointly. The first defendant ceased to prepare and sell eatables after the plaintiff became Karnam in the year 1961 and except the 1st Item, which were jointly purchased in the name of the plaintiff and the first defendant, rest of the items were acquired in the name of the first defendant out of the income generated by the plaintiff and thus, all the suit properties are joint family properties.

2.3. The plaintiff would further aver that he got married in the year 1958 and his wife died without any issues and therefore, he married for the second time and the second defendant married the third defendant in the year 1964 and begot the defendants 4 to 7 and the third defendant also closely related to him. The plaintiff, during March 1998, started living separately on account of adamant attitude exhibited by the second defendant and during the month of December, 1998, the first defendant persuaded the plaintiff to come and join the family and accordingly, he began to live separately on the western portion of the tiled house while the second defendant began to live in the eastern portion and however, the second defendant continued to exhibit hostile attitude. It is also stated by the plaintiff that the second defendant was suspended during the year 1980 and therefore, the entire family was maintained out of the agricultural income and he was also litigating with regard to abolition of the post of Village Karnam and for admission of his son/sixth defendant, capitation fees and incidental expenses are borne out of the joint income and though the plaintiff made demands to the defendants 1 and 2 and the legal heir of the defendants for partition and separate possession, it was not acceded to and therefore, a Lawyer's Notice was issued and Panchayat was convened and as per the decision taken, the plaintiff was persuaded to have 4.70 acres out of the total extent of 14.77 acres and also the old house and Item Nos.3 and 5 - vacant sites and despite the said arrangement, the first defendant failed to part with the title, which is pertaining the suit property.

2.4. The plaintiff would