T. N. VALLINAYAGAM, J.

( 1 ) THE L. Rs of the defendant are the appellants. The suit for partition and injunction in respect of six items of the property, claiming half share thereof, was dismissed by the trial Court, but came to be decreed by the appellate Court on appeal by the plaintiff. Hence, the defendant is before this Court questioning the decree of the first appellate Court.

( 2 ) THE case of the plaintiff was that the plaintiff and defendant are full brothers; originally plaintiff had three properties. There was a partition among them in 1950 and they began to live separately. But plaintiff being youngest and without any experience, as the mother was alive, continued to live with the defendant and the mother of the defendant was managing the property. While so in 1967, when the mother died, the defendant began to deny the right of the plaintiff, hence the suit came to be filed for partition.

( 3 ) THE defendant contended, while admitting the relationship and also the fact that there was a partition among brothers of the plaintiff and the defendant, denied that the plaintiff began to live with the defendant. It is incorrect to say that the lands of the plaintiff as well as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document