ORAL JUDGMENT

2. For convenience, the parties are referred to based on their rankings before the trial Court. The appellants were the defendants and the respondent was the plaintiff.

The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for partition and separate possession. It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant No.1 is the father of the plantiff and defendants No.2 to 3 and the suit schedule properties are the ancestral and joint family properties of the plaintiff and defendants No.1 to 3. It is contended that a family arrangement was made between the plaintiff's father, Defendant No.1 and his siblings, Bommegowda and Puttaswamy. Later on the plaintiff's father was given the suit properties towards his share and thereby the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 3 became the joint family members. The suit schedule properties are the ancestral and joint family properties of the plaintiff and defend