The main legal point established in the judgment is the burden of proof in establishing joint family property and the validity of family arrangements.

JUDGMENT :

G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.

Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, praying against the judgment and decree dated 17.10.2007 made in A.S. No. 230 of 2006 on the file of the Sub-Judge, Mannargudi reversing the judgment and decree dated 12.09.2006 made in O.S. No. 25/2004 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi.

1. The suit filed for declaration and consequential injunction in respect of the suit property was allowed by the trial Court but was partly reversed by the first appellate Court declining the relief of declaration. Hence, the second appeal, by the aggrieved plaintiffs.

2. The relevant facts necessary for deciding this appeal in nutshell:

Case of the plaintiffs:

The plaintiffs are grand sons of Rasaiya Pillai-Sundarakannu ammal couple. Narayana Pillai is one of his five sons. Rasaiya Pillai died in the year 1953. Leaving behind his wife, 5 sons and a daughter. After his demise, the sons of Rasaiya pillai effected partition of the family properties of Rasjaiya Pillai through the family arrangement reduced into writing on 23.11.1959. They continued to be as a joint family and through joint exertion of family members, they purchased properties in the name of the family members. In the year 1977, Sundarakannu Ammal died. Before her death, in the year 1975 during the later part of the July month in the presence of elders arrangement between the family members arrived. 2.13 acres land in R.S. No. 58/4 at Rayanallur Village purchased in the name of the mother Sundarakannu Ammal in the year 1970 was allotted to the third defendant Jayalakshmi. Out of total extent of 3.19 acres land in 6 different survey numbers at Chettimoolai village purchased in the name of Jayalaksmi from one Velautham Pillai on 21.04.1973, 1.68 acres form part of the first three items and 56 cents out of 1.72 acres in the 6th item shown in the sale-deed was allotted to the branch of Narayana Pillai. The said property was divided among the sons of Narayana Pillai and those properties are the subject matter of the suit shown as ‘A’ and ‘B’ and ‘C’ schedule of the plaint. The plaintiffs, as per the family arrangement of the year 1975, are in possession and enjoyment of the property, after effecting mutation of revenue records. Patta for the suit properties stands in the name respective plaintiffs. Chitta and adangal stands in their respective names and they are paying kist and enjoying it absolutely raising loan creating encumbrance to the property.

3. When the Government acquired 2.17 acres of land, out of 12.19 acres purchased in the name of their mother Sundarakannu ammal, which was given to the shares of her 5 sons, as per the family arrangement, the 3rd defendant sought a share in the compensation amount. The plaintiffs refused to accede her request, since under the family arrangement, she had no right in it. Disgruntled by the refusal, the 3rd defendant through her sons, who are the first and second defendants, out of animosity started troubling the plaintiffs enjoyment of the suit property. In this connection, police complaint was given against the defendants by Narayana Pillai. To protect their title and possession, the suit laid.

4. The case of the defendants:

The claim of the plaintiffs that the properties of Sundarakannu ammal was divided among her children by way of family arrangement during the month of July 1975 denied. 3rd defendant have 1/6th right in the properties left by Sundarakannu ammal. The alleged Will of Sundarakannu Ammal 01.01.1965 is denied. As far as the suit properties, the 3rd defendant from out of her sridana and from the savings of her husband, who was working as a Teacher, purchased 3.19 acres of land at Chettimoolai Village from Velautham Pillai under sale-deed dated 21.04.1973. It is the absolute property of 3rd defendant and not purchased from the joint exertion of the family members as alleged by the plaintiffs. The family arrangement of the year 1975 is denied. After the demise of