The court upheld the entitlement of the plaintiff's share in ancestral properties and directed the determination of her legal heirs and the validity of her Will before distribution.

JUDGMENT :

PRAYER: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated September 20, 2018 passed in A.S.No.19 of 2017 by the Additional District Court, Erode, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated March 20, 2017 passed in O.S.No.86 of 2011 by the II Additional Subordinate Court, Erode.

This Second Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated September 20, 2018 passed in A.S.No.19 of 2017 by the 'II Additional District Court (Mahalir Neethimandram), Erode' [henceforth 'First Appellate Court'], confirming the Judgment and Decree dated March 20, 2017 passed in O.S.No.86 of 2011 by the 'II Additional Subordinate Court, Erode' [henceforth 'Trial Court'].

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit.

Plaintiff's case:

3. One Subbanna Gounder had four children, namely Palaniammal (plaintiff), Pongiammal, Valliammal and Pavayammal. The said Subbanna Gounder died intestate in 1984. His wife passed away intestate in the year 1974. After the demise of Subbanna Gounder, the plaintiff and her sisters are each entitled to common 1/4 share in the Suit Properties which are their joint family properties. Pongiammal, one of the daughters of Subbanna Gounder, died intestate long back leaving behind the defendants 3 to 7 and one Ayyavoo. The said Ayyavoo died intestate two years back from the date of Plaint, leaving behind the defendants 1 and 2 as his legal heirs. Another daughter - Valliammal also died intestate leaving behind the defendants 14 to 16 and one Muthulakshmi as her legal heirs. The said Muthulakshmi also died intestate long back. The defendants 8 to 13 are the legal heirs of Muthulakshmi. The above said Pavayammal also died intestate leaving behind the defendants 17 and 21 and her husband - Palanisamy. The said Palanisamy also died intestate leaving behind the defendants 18 to 20 as his legal heirs/legal representatives.

4. The Suit Properties exclusively belong to the plaintiff and her sisters. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/4 share therein. The defendants 1 to 7 are jointly entitled to 1/4 share therein. Similarly, the defendants 8 to 16 are together entitled to 1/4 share; and the defendants 17 to 21 are together entitled to the remaining 1/4 share in the Suit Properties. The plaintiff and the defendants are in joint possession and enjoyment over the Suit Properties. The plaintiff felt some inconvenience in joint possession and enjoyment of the Suit Properties. Hence, the plaintiff filed the Suit for partition and separate possession.

Defendants' case:

5. The 15th defendant filed Written Statement denying the averments made in the Plaint. She averred that the plaintiff was given in marriage to a wealthy family with substantial amount of seervarisai. The plaintiff had no issues. Hence, Subbanna Gounder gifted some of his properties in favour of his daughters - Pongiammal & Pavayammal, and they have alienated their shares. Further, Subbanna Gounder had orally gifted the Suit Properties to his daughter - Valliammal, the 15th defendant’s mother who got into exclusive possession and enjoyment of the Suit Properties including the house property, as her own, to the knowledge of everyone including the plaintiff and the other defendants. On that basis, with regard to the Suit Properties, Patta was granted in favour of Valliammal by competent authority. The plaintiff and the other defendants are fully aware of this and did not raise any objection till her death.

6. Subsequently, Valliammal gifted Item Nos. 1 to 3 of the Suit Properties excluding the house bearing Door No.10A to the four daughters of the 15th defendant under four Deeds dated September 8, 2003. Thereafter, the four daughters were in possession and enjoyment of their specific plots, as absolute owners, to the knowledge of everyone including the plaintiff and the other defendants. The plaintiff is fully aware of the