Plaint rejection under Order VII Rule 11 upheld where averments admit knowledge of challenged partition deed since 2002, rendering 2021 suit barred by 3-year limitation under Article 59, without need for trial.

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

1. The appellant is the plaintiff in a suit for partition, aggrieved by rejection of plaint in I.A.No.25 of 2025, has preferred the present first appeal. After arguments and judgment was also reserved in the appeal, the appellant came out with an application in C.M.P.No.5759 of 2026 for raising additional grounds in the appeal and hence, the appeal suit was reopened and further arguments were heard on 27.02.2026. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed seeking permission to raise additional grounds is taken up along with the main Appeal.

2. Pleadings:

The plaint in brief:

2.1. The Plaintiff is the daughter of Ekambara Mudaliar, who owned the schedule mentioned properties. He was married to Anjalakshi Ammal and they blessed with a son Jayavel. After the demise of his wife Anjalakshi Ammal, in 1948, the said Ekambara Mudaliar married the plaintiff's mother Kullammal, who is none else than the own younger sister of his wife, Anjalakshi Ammal. Ekambara Mudaliar and Kullammal were blessed with one son and 3 daughters, namely, Alagesan, Varalaxshmi-5th defendant, Kalavati-6th defendant and Buvaneswari-plaintiff. The said Ekambara Mudaliar died in 1990; his son Alagesan also died subsequently in the year 1994; Kullammal also died in the year of 2002. Alagesan died leaving behind his wife 7th defendant, daughter 8th defendant and son 9th defendant.

2.2. The son Jayavel born to first wife, Anjalakshi Ammal died in the year 2013, leaving behind his wife Amirthavalli, sons Jagajothi, Selva Prakash viz., defendants 1 and 2 and another son Manikkavasagam. The said Manikkavasagam also died, leaving behind his mother Amirthavalli and wife and son viz., defendants 3 and 4 respectively. Amirthavalli died in the year 2019; Jayavel also died in the year 2019.

2.3. The father Ekambara Mudaliar had ancestral property at Kinnar Village, which were agricultural lands under cultivation by Ekambara Mudaliar. He also had a vegetable business, from and out of the said income as well as income from the agricultural properties, he purchased several properties.

2.4. One such property purchased by Ekambara Mudaliar is comprised in survey No. 294, of extent of 1 acre 65, cents together with 3 HP electric motor at Kinnar Village, Madhuragham Taluk. The property was purchased in the name of his wife Anjalakshi Ammal for the benefit of family. Anjalakshi Ammal was a housewife with no independent income to purchase the said property; the sale deed standing in the name of Anjalakshi Ammal is only a sham and nominal document and does not get exempted under the provision of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 therefore, the property belonged only to Ekambara Mudaliar.

2.5. While so, the plaintiff in the year 2018 came in possession of a photostat copy of a partition deed in and whereby Ekambara Mudaliar during his lifetime along with the brothers of the plaintiff Jayavel, Alagesan had entered into a partition and divided ancestral properties. The partition deed is a bogus document not binding on the plaintiff Ekambara Mudaliar was himself not a beneficiary to any property under the partition deed dated 13.12.1985. The plaintiff received a certified copy of the document only in the year 2014 and the plaintiff, being a legal heir, entitled to share, has been kept away from legitimate share in the joint family property.

2.6. The father also purchased lands in old TS No. 553/1A 1B, New TS No.553/5, sub divided as T.S.No.553/5A. The plaintiff'