JUDGMENT :

R. Subbiah, J.

1. The Plaintiffs in O.S. No. 534 of 2010 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore are the appellants in this appeal. They have come forward with this appeal, aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 21.11.2017 passed by the said court dismissing the suit filed by them for partition and separate possession of the plaint schedule mentioned property and for other reliefs.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as 'Plaintiffs' and 'defendants' as they are arrayed before the trial court.

3. One Guruvappa Naidu had two sons and they are Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu. Govindasamy Naidu had a son by name Annasamy. Chinnama Naidu had two sons and they are Ponnusamy, tenth defendant and Ramachandran. Ponnusamy, tenth defendant died during the pendency of the suit and therefore, his legal heirs were impleaded as D13 to D15 in the suit. The Plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Ramachandran.

4. Annasamy, Son of Govindasamy Naidu died leaving behind his legal heirs by name Dhanalakshmi, Kamalam (D-1), Duraisamy (D-2), A. Rajagopal (D-3), A. Dhamodaraswamy. Among the legal heirs of Annasamy, Dhanalakshmi and Dhamodaraswamy died even before the institution of the suit and therefore they are not arrayed as parties to the suit. The first defendant Kamalam died during the pendency of the suit and therefore her legal heirs were brought in as D-11 and D-12 respectively. Similarly, the second defendant Duraisamy died and his legal heirs were brought in as D-16 to D-18 in the suit. The defendants 4, 5 and 6 are the legal heirs of Dhamodarasamy, son of Annasamy. Dhanalakshmi, Daughter of Annasamy died even before institution of the suit and therefore her son by name Ravichandran was arrayed as seventh defendant in the suit.

5. For more clarity and better appreciation of the relationship of the parties to the suit, it must be stated that the plaintiffs and defendants are descendants of Guruvappa Naidu. As mentioned above, Guruvappa Naidu had two sons namely Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu. In other words, Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu are brothers. Govindasamy Naidu died in the year 1948 and Chinnama Naidu died in the year 1954. The Plaintiffs are sons and daughters of Ramachandran, who is one of the sons of Chinnama Naidu. The other son of Chinnama Naidu is Ponnusamy, who is arrayed as 10th defendant in the suit. Since Ponnusamy died during the pendency of the suit, his sons and daughters were arrayed as D13 to D15 in the suit. The other defendants in the suit are descendants of Annasamy, who is the only son of Govindasamy Naidu.

6. The entire case of the plaintiffs rests on the fact that Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu, brothers, along with one Appa Naidu have purchased a larger extent of land measuring 21.64 acres in Pattanam Village, jointly under a Sale deed dated 05.04.1911 registered as document No. 558 of 1911 on the file of Sub-Registrar, Sulur. As per the sale deed dated 05.04.1911, Appasamy Naidu purchased undivided half share in the land measuring 21.64 acres and the remaining undivided half share was jointly purchased by the brothers namely Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu. According to the plaintiffs, both the brothers namely Govindasamy Naidu and Chinnama Naidu have equally contributed money for purchase of the half share covered under the sale deed dated 05.04.1911. However, the sale deed was executed in the name of Govindasamy Naidu, being elder among the brothers as per the practice which was prevailing on those days. Even though the sale deed stood in the name of the elder brother Govindasamy Naidu, the younger brother Chinnama Naidu also enjoyed the lands by exercising rights of ownership equally along with his elder brother. The said Govindasamy Naidu was holding a fiduciary position in relation to his younger brother Chinnasamy Naidu. It is the case of the plaintiffs that such a fiduciary capacity continued till the death of Govindasamy Naidu in