JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal arises out of a suit for partition filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree for her 1/5th share in the suit schedule properties. Since the appeal purely rests upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2020 (9) SCC 1 [Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma and Others], I do not propose to discuss at the length the pleadings, judgment of the Courts below and the submissions of the counsels except to briefly touch upon the same.

2. The plaintiff and the 4th defendant are daughters and defendants

1 to 3 are the sons of one Rathina Mudaliar. The case of the plaintiff was that the properties belonged to Rathina Mudaliar and on his death intestate the properties devolved equally upon the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4.

3. Defendants 1 to 3 on the other hand had filed a written statement contending that the properties are the ancestral properties. They had also stated that a portion of the suit schedule properties had been sold to one Janakiraman, Ramadoss and Meerabai even prior to filing of the suit.

However, the plaintiff has not chosen to implead the purchasers.

4. A preliminary decree was passed on 13.08.2004 by the learned Principal District Munsif, V