The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of res judicata in the context of related suits and the impact of failing to challenge a judgment and decree in a related suit.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2008 made in A.S.No.71 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Court, Salem, reversing the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2006 made in O.S.No.891 of 1995 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Salem.

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2008 passed in A.S.No.71 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Court, Salem, reversing the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2006 passed in O.S.No.891 of 1995 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Salem.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial court.

3. The third defendant in O.S.No.891 of 1995 is the appellant in this second appeal.

4. Suit for partition and declaration.

5. Briefly stated the case of the plaintiff is that she is the daughter of the first defendant and the sister of the defendants 2 to 6 and the defendants 7 to 30 are the tenants in the suit properties. The plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 6 are the legal heirs of the deceased Kumaran and the suit properties are the ancestral and self acquired properties of the deceased Kumaran who died intestate on 27.02.1992 leaving his Lrs as aforestated. The items 1 to 3 of the suit properties are the self acquired properties and the item 4 is the ancestral property of the deceased Kumaran and till his demise, it was only Kumaran who had been in the possession and enjoyment of the suit properties as the Karta of the family, by leasing out certain portion of the same to the defendants 7 to 30 and after his demise, the plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 6 are in the joint possession and enjoyment of the suit properties and the third defendant has been collecting the rents from the tenants and not gave any share to the plaintiff in the rental income and the plaintiff was also necessitated to levy the suit against the third defendant in O.S.No.420 of 1995 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Salem, seeking for the relief of permanent injunction and the third defendant filed the suit against the plaintiff on untenable grounds in O.S.No.432 of 1995 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Salem, for the eviction of the plaintiff from the suit properties. The third defendant had created a forged Will dated 19.01.1992 said to have been executed in his favour by the deceased Kumaran qua the suit properties, however, the abovesaid Will is not true and the deceased Kumaran had not executed any Will bequeathing the suit properties to anyone. The third defendant is involved in criminal activities and not cooperating with the family. The plaintiff as one of the legal heir of the deceased Kumaran, is entitled to obtain 1/7 share in the item No. 1 to 3 of the suit properties and 1/35 share in the item 4 of the suit properties and as the defendants had failed to effect the partition and allot the due share of the plaintiff in the suit properties, according to the plaintiff, she has been necessitated to institute the suit against the defendants for appropriate reliefs.

6. The third defendant resisted the plaintiff's suit contending that the relationship between the parties is correct and it is false to state that the items 1 to 3 are the self acquired properties of the deceased Kumaran and on the other hand according to him, the items 1 to 3 of the suit properties had been acquired by the joint efforts of the third defendant and the deceased Kumaran and the third defendant has spent Rs.10 lakhs for the construction of the building in item No.1 of the suit properties and with reference to the item 1, O.S.No.1552 of 2008 has been contested only by the third defendant and the plaintiff and the other defendants had remained exparte in the abovesaid suit and it is only the third defendant who is in the possession and enjoyment of the first item. The deceased Kumaran had executed a Will in favour of the third de