The court affirmed that relinquishment of property rights can be established through participatory actions and admissions, invalidating subsequent claims that contradict earlier agreements.

JUDGMENT

Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated August 6, 2015 passed in O.S.No.185 of 2013 by the 'I Additional District Court, Erode' ['Trial Court' for brevity], the defendants 1 and 2 therein have filed this Appeal Suit under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 33 of 'the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ' ['CPC' for short].

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit.

PLAINTIFF'S CASE

3. Case of the plaintiff as put forth in the plaint and the reply statement is as follows:

3.1. The suit properties along with some other properties were originally an ancestral entitlement of Karuppana Gounder. Karuppana Gounder had one son namely Velappa Gounder and four daughters namely Rasayammal, Pappayammal, Kolandayammal and Pavayammal. Velappa Gounder married Ponnayammal / third defendant and has two sons viz., the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 and one daughter viz., the plaintiff in the wedlock.

3.2. Karuppana Gounder and his four daughters filed a Suit for partition in respect of ancestral properties and 75 Cents land left behind by their mother, vide O.S. No.2855 of 1981 on the file of District Munsif, Erode. A compromise was struck and its result was Partition Deed dated September 25, 1981.

3.3. Vide Partition Deed dated September 25, 1981, ancestral properties including the suit properties were partitioned. In the partition, Karuppana Gounder was given life interest over a house property described in “A” Schedule thereof, which is to go to the hands of his daughters and Defendant Nos.1 and 2 after his lifetime. Further, the Defendant Nos.1 and 2, for themselves and on behalf of the plaintiff and her mother / third defendant, were together allotted an extent of common 4 Acres 85 Cents in the total extent of 9 Acre 70 Cents as described in the “B” Schedule thereof, while Karuppana Gounder's four daughters were together allotted 2 Acres of land described in “C” Schedule thereof. Properties under “B” Schedule thereof viz., half share in the total extent of 9 Acre 70 Cents forms the suit properties herein.

3.4. The family was having half share only and the remaining half belonged to other co-sharers who are third parties. The marriage of plaintiff took place on September 13, 1981 i.e., a few days before the partition and since her husband Subramani was not possessed of an ancestral house to live in, the plaintiff chose to live with her husband in the house belonging to the family. In these circumstances, having utmost faith in the words of first defendant, the plaintiff and her mother / third defendant agreed that they need not be allotted separate shares, instead suit properties may be allotted in the names of Defendant Nos.1 and 2. The plaintiff never intended to give up on her share in the suit properties, but only wanted to remain joint till a final partition being effected among all the co-sharers. In short, in the Partition Deed dated September 13, 1981, the suit properties were jointly allotted to the plaintiff and Defendant Nos.1 and 2, but in the name of Defendant Nos.1 and 2.

3.5. While so, without the knowledge of the plaintiff, the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 entered into a partition on June 23, 1983 with co-sharers and the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 were together allotted the southern half share of 4 Acre 16 Cents. The plaintiff is a necessary party for the Partition Deed dated June 23, 1983 and as she was omitted, it does not bind her.

3.6. The plaintiff has be