JUDGMENT :

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

1. The Second Appeal in S.A. No. 795 of 1993 is filed against the concurrent finding of the Courts below, decreeing the suit filed for recovery of possession and for past profits.

2. The Second Appeal in S.A.(MD) No. 447 of 2008 is filed as against the concurrent finding of the Courts below against the decree and judgment passed for granting partition.

3. The revision in C.R.P.(PD)(MD) No. 1299 of 2016 is filed to strike off the interlocutory application filed in I.A. No. 271 of 2011 in O.S. No. 128 of 1981 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru.

4. Since the parties in both the appeals and the revision are one and the same and the issue relates to the settlement deed dated 26.02.1972, this Court is of the view that in order to give quietus to the litigation, both the appeals and the revision are being disposed of in this common judgment.

5. The brief facts leading to the filing of both the suits and the revision are as follows:

The suit properties comprised in both the suits originally owned by one T.M. Anna Pillai. He had five daughters, namely Kalyanasundari Ammal, Vimala Devi, Senthilkumari, Parimala Gandhi and Pankajavalli. The plaintif