In a partition suit, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the joint family status and income sources of the properties claimed, failing which the suit may be dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

The plaintiff, in a suit for partition, aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit by the trial Court, is the appellant herein.

2.Pleadings:

The Plaint in brief:

2.1. T.R.Sundara Gounder is the father of the plaintiff; defendants 2 to 4 and husband of the first defendant and under an oral partition he became entitled to 'A' scheduled properties. 'A' Schedule properties are ancestral properties at the hands of the plaintiffs and the defendants 2 to 4. T.R. Sundara Gounder died on 10.03.1978 and his wife Parvathy died, pending suit viz., on 23.12.2010. The said Sundara Gounder was the Kartha of the joint family and had purchased several properties from and out of the income acquring from ancestral and joint family properties, viz.,, suit 'A' Schedule properties. However, he had chosen to purchase properties not only in his name, but also in the name of his sons, viz., the plaintiff and the second defendant, his wife viz., first defendant and his daughter viz., fourh defendant, besides also daughter- in-law, viz., 7^th defendant. The said Sundara Gounder also constructed a residential bungalow at Thagaracheri Village in or about 1955, out of the joint family income. Though the properties were purchased in the names of the co-parceners and family members, the said Sundara Gounder, as kartha, was managing the properties and effecting improvements thereto viz., levelling the lands, digging new wells, deepening of existing wells and also purchased on agricultural vehicle, motor pumps and obtained service connections. The properties purchased by the Kartha are set out in 'B' Schedule to the plaint. Schedule 'A' nad 'B' properties got enormus income from the joint family properties. The main source of income for the Hindu Joint family is from the main crops like cotton, plaintain, sugar cane, paddy ragi and groundnut crops, which were cultivated in Schedules A and B properties.

2.2. The third defendant was not happy and her husband, deserted her, within few months of the marriage and therefore, she was forced to come back to the parent's house and eversince, the third defendant has been living in the joint family, in the ancestral house at Thagarapatti Village.

2.3. The second defendant's marriage was celebrated in a grand manner by the plaintiff's father and he is also living under the roof of the Hindu Joint Family along with the defendants 5 to 8. Similarly, the fourth defendant's marriage was also celebrated in February – 1977. The plaintiff was educated as Law Graduate by the father of the plaintiff.

2.4. After the death of Sundara Gounder, the second defendant, being the eldest member of the joint family, took charge as kartha and continued to raise cotton crops, generating substantial income. The second defendant also performed the marriage of the plaintiff. The fifth defendant is a law graduate; the sixth defendant is a medical practioner, whose education was also funded by the joint family, from and out of available surplus funds in the hands of the joint family. The second defendant also celebrated the marriage of the 8th defendant in a grand manner and had given 110 soverigns of jewels, besides Rs.75,000/- as Sreethana in the year 1985. The marriage expenses and the money required for Sridhana properties were also met out of surplus funds available to the joint family. Similarly, the marriage of the fifth defendant with the ninth defendant was also performed by the second defendant. Likewise, the marriage of the sixth defendant with the 10^th defendant was also performed by the second defendant and both the said marriages were celebrated from and out of