G.S. Singhvi, J. — These appeals filed against judgment dated 22.2.1999 of the learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court represent culmination of the dispute among the heirs of Shri D. Yellappa, who died intestate on 27.03.1978, in relation to his properties.

2. Appellant, Y. Nagaraj, is the son of the deceased and respondent Nos.l to 3-Smt. Jalajakshi, Smt. Y. Susheela and Smt. Y. Nirmalakumari are his daughters. They are governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law as also the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act’), for the sake of convenience, they shall hereinafter be referred to with the same description.

3. Respondent No.1 filed O.S. No. 286 of 1979 (renumbered as O.S. No. 4528 of 1980) impleading the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as defendants for partition of the properties specified in Schedules ‘A’ and ‘B’ into four equal shares by metes and bound and for allotment of one share to her with absolute title and possession. She further prayed that the appellant be directed to give account of the income of the suit schedule properties with effect from 27.3.1978 and pay 1/4th share to her. In the alternative, she prayed that an inquiry be ordered under Order XXIX Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, ‘the CPC’) for determination of mesne profits. The schedules appended to the plaint are extracted below:

Schedule ‘A’ :

(1) Vacant land bearing Kaneshumari No. 130, of Dommasaacha Village, Surjapura Hobli, Anekal TaIuk bounded on the

East by : Nagi Reddy House

West by : Konda Reddy House

North by : Road

South by : Erappa’s land

Measuring East West about 42' North-South about 45'.

Schedule ‘B’ :

(1) S. No. 96/1, measuring 2 acres and 5 guntas

(2) S. No. 108/2, measuring 1 acre 28 guntas

(3) S. No. 79/2, measuring 3 acres 35 guntas

all these properties situated at Thigala, Chowdadenahalli, Sarjapur Hobli, Anekla Tq, Bangalore Distt.,

(4) S.No. 205, measuring 1 acre 22 guntas situated at Dommasandra village, AnekIa, Taluk.

(5) A house bearing D.No. 100, and new Nos. 100/1 and 100/2, measuring about 82' x 21' situated at Susheela Road Doddamavalli, Bangalore 4.

(6) Any other property standing in the name of late D. Yellappa, or any of his family members.

(7) Jewels worth about Rs. 10,000/-

(8) Household utensils worth about Rs. 10,000/-

(9) Bank deposits.”

(As extracted from the judgment of XVII Additional City Civil-Judge, Bangalore.)

4. The claim of respondent No.1 was founded on the following assertions:

(a) That late Shri D. Yellappa, who retired as Revenue Inspector from the Corporation of the City Bangalore, was an affluent person and possessed some ancestral properties (described in Schedule ‘A’) and self-acquired movable and immovable properties (described in Schedule ‘B’).

(b) That Shri D. Yellappa died intestate on 27.3.1978 and being his Class II heirs, the parties are entitled to share in his estate.

(c) That respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are unmarried and by taking advantage of his position as the son of the deceased, the appellant is wasting the property and trying to alienate the same.

5. In the written statement filed by him, the appellant denied that Shri D. Yellappa had only a bit of ancestral property. He pleaded that the suit properties are joint family properties because the same had been acquired out of joint family income and respondent No. 1 had erroneously characterized the same as self-acquired properties of the deceased. The appellant further pleaded that his father had sold some properties to one Papaiah; that the agricultural lands shown in the plaint schedule were subject matter of the proceedings pending before Land Tribunal, Anekal for grant of occupancy rights; that Item No.3 of plaint Schedule ‘B’ had been purchased in his name vide sale deed dated 29.4.1961 and he was absolute owner thereof and that the jewellery, utensils, bank accounts, etc., mentioned at Item Nos. 7 to 9 of Schedule ‘B’ were n