JUDGMENT :

R.N. Manjula, J.

1. This Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2009 passed in A.S. No. 23/2008 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Hosur.

2. The Appellants are plaintiffs in the suit. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred as plaintiffs and defendants during the course of this discussion.

3. The averments of the parties in brief:

The suit property is situated in S. No. 59 of Siddhanapalli Village, Hosur Taluk which comprised of 3 acres and 52 cents. The patta for the above said property stood in the name of the plaintiff's grandfather, Jingala Muniappa. And the said lands in the suit property later sub divided as S. Nos. 59/2A, 59/2B and 59/2C.

3.1. The said Jingala Muniappa had three sons namely Venkataramanappa, Chinnappa and Venkatappa. The plaintiffs 1 to 6 are the legal heirs of Venkatappa. The wife of Venkatappa is no more. The 1st defendant is the daughter of Chinnappa. In the year 1948, an oral partition took place among the three sons and their father Jingala Muniappa. In the said partition, the lands in S. No. 59/2 (3 acres and 52 cents) was divided into 4 shares, comprising of 88 cents each. The elder son Venkataramanappa sold his share of 88 cents in favour of one Ramappa on 15.04.1968. Another son Chinnappa settled his share of 88 cents in favour of his daughter Obamma on 07.11.1962. Jingala Muniappa bequeathed his share by virtue of a Will dated 07.03.1948. In view of that, Venkattappa, who is the father of the plaintiffs became entitled to 1 acre 76 cents in S. No. 59/2 i.e. in the suit property.

3.2. The 2nd defendant Narriappa is the husband of the 1st defendant Obamma; Narriappa is not entitled to any extent of land in S. No. 59/2. However he misrepresented before the U.D.R. officials and secured patta in his name for an extent of 0.86.5 hectares in S. No. 59/2A. Even the 1st defendant herself has got only 88 cents by virtue of the settlement executed in her favour by her father Chinnappa. Even though U.D.R. shows the extent of property in S. No. 59/2 as 5 acres 27 cents, on ground there is only an extent of 3 acres 52 cents is available. The defendants 3 and 4 are the sons of 1st and 2nd defendants. The defendants have got no right over the suit property in S. No. 59/2.

4. The written statement of the 2nd defendant in brief is as under:

The written statement of the 2nd defendant was adopted by the other defendants. In the written statement, it is stated that an extent of 0.02.5 hectares land in S. No. 59/2 has been classified as 'Poramboke'. The patta number pertains to the entire extent of 3 acres 52 cents comprised in S. No. 59/2 is 42. It was a joint patta stood in the name of 3 sons of Jingala Muniappa. Since the husband of Venkatamma died, she was under the care and custody of her father Jingala Muniappa and her father had settled his share of 88 cents in her favour.

4.1. On 07.11.1962, his second son Chinnappa had settled his share in favour of his daughter Obamma, who is the 1st defendant herein. The said Obamma married Nariappa, who is the son of Venkatamma. Hence, Nariappa has been in enjoyment of 88 cents which was settled in favour of his wife Obamma along with another 88 cents got by his mother Venkatamma. Thus, the 1st defendant Obamma and her husband Nariappa (2nd defendant) were in enjoyment of 1 acre and 76 cents in S. No. 59/2. Only because of that the patta for an extent of 0.86.5 in S. No. 59/2 A stands in the name of Nariappa. It is false to state that Jingala Muniappa had executed a Will in favour of the father of the plaintiffs 1 to 5 namely, Venkatappa and hence, the plaintiffs have got no right over the suit properties.

5. On the basis of the above pleadings, the trial Court has framed the following issues:

other language

6. During the course of trial, on the side of the plaintiff two witnesses have been examined as P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 and five documents have been marked as Ex. A.1 to A.5. On the side of the defendants also