A legal heir is entitled to an equal share in joint family properties, and claims of exclusive ownership must be substantiated by evidence.

JUDGMENT :

This Second Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment and decree dated 21.03.2011 in A.S.No.9 of 2006 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Gingee, confirming the decree and judgment dated 20.01.2005 in O.S.No.59 of 1995 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Gingee.

2. Heard Mr.R.Rajaraman, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.T.Dhanasekaran, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. The first defendant is the appellant against whom the plaintiff has filed a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/7th share in the suit property. The Trial Court has decreed the suit and passed a preliminary decree in respect of 1/7th share of the plaintiff as prayed. The first defendant has preferred a First Appeal challenging the preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court and the same was dismissed by confirming the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. Aggrieved over that, the first defendant has preferred this Second Appeal.

4. The short facts pleaded in the plaint are as follows:

The suit 'A' schedule properties are the self-acquired properties of one Rayar Gounder. The suit 'B' schedule properties belonged to one Kuttiammal who is the sister of Rayar Gounder. However, Rayar Gounder was in enjoyment of 'A' and 'B' schedule properties. Kuttiammal did not have any legal heirs other than her brother Rayar Gounder. Both Rayar Gounder and Kuttiammal died intestate. Subsequent to the death of Rayar Gounder, his wife, four daughters and two sons inherited the suit properties as their legal heirs. The plaintiff is one among the four daughters. She was married to one Jayagopal Gounder and the said Jayagopal Gounder died at the young age and she lived separately in the suit property by assisting her father who was doing agricultural works. The plaintiff and the defendants are entitled to get equal share in the properties of Rayar Gounder. However, the first defendant who is one of the sons of the Rayar Gounder is claiming exclusive right over the suit property. Hence, the plaintiff has issued a legal notice to the defendants 1 to 3 on 02.12.1994 calling upon them to effect partition and to allot 1/7 share of her. The defendants 1 to 3 received the legal notice but did not send any reply. Hence, the plaintiff has filed a suit for partition.

5. The written statement filed by the first defendant are as follows:

The items 1 to 3 under suit 'A' schedule property is the self-acquired property of the son of the first defendant by name Munusamy and he is in enjoyment of the same. Since the plaintiff was a widow, Kuttiammal executed a sale deed on 11.03.1987 in respect of the property in S.No.31/6 comprising an extent of 85 cents in favour of the plaintiff without receiving any consideration. On 11.03.1987, a settlement deed was also executed by the third defendant in favour of the plaintiff for 51 1/2 cents in S.No.24/8. The plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The first and second defendants had purchased 20 cents out of 1 acre 35 cents in S.No.28/19 on 01.02.1989 in the name of Elumalai who is the minor son of the plaintiff. So the plaintiff has been given with enough properties even during the life time of Rayar Gounder and Kuttiammal in pursuant to the oral partition that has been entered in the month of June 1985.

5.1. The plaintiff's father had given the suit items 4,8,9,10,12,14,23 and 24 under 'A' schedule and western half of items 2,5,6,13,15,17,19 and 22 of 'A' schedule property in favour of the second defendant. The properties in the name of Kuttiammal has been given to the second defendant and thereafter, they were obtained through a sale deed in favour of the second defendant's daughter. Items 3,7,11,16,18 and 25 in 'A' schedule properties and eastern half of items 2,5,6,13,15,17,19 and 22 of 'A' schedule properties and the whole of 'B' schedule properties have been allotted to the first defendant. From then onwards, the first and second defendant