Tiêu đề Soundarraj WS OS 26835.2013.docx ✅

That the defendant 1 to 3 being proper and necessary parties who were entitled for share in the partition of the schedule property, have got executed the said partition deed and have divided the property as per their understanding and entitlement. 6. That after the partition among the defendants 1 to 3 they are in possession and enjoyment of the portion of the property that has fallen to their respective shares. The plaintiffs have no right to seek for partition, as the share of late D.Jayaraj was provided way back. The plaintiffs have not put up any construction on the schedule property and the averments that they have put up construction on the schedule property is false and concocted stories of the Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs are put to strict proof of the same. That the Defendant has never tried to alienate the schedule property and the averment to this regard is false and frivolous. The Plaintiffs are misusing the goodness of this Defendant who has given shelter at much lessor rent to them and has taken care of all the needs of Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs with intent to knock off the property and to bring this Defendant to their terms has filed this above suit. The Plaintiffs to make illegal gains which they are not entitled for were coercing this Defendant to fulfill with their demands. That when the Defendant did not give heed to the illegal demands of the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs issued legal notice dated 09.03.2013 and 06.05.2013 demanding Defendants to partition the schedule property by metes and bounds. 7. That the Plaintiffs after causing the notice to the Defendants approached this Defendant and threatened that if this Defendant will not comply to the their demands they would file the suit for partition in a court of law and see that this Defendant keeps running around courts and meet the terms. That when the Defendant did not bend to their demands the above suit is filed. 8. The Defendant herein is senior citizen and was an employee of a Private Company and has worked for a period of 30 years. This Defendant retired in the years 2001 and from the saving and earnings of this Defendant the house is put up on the schedule property. The Defendant being goodhearted person helped the Plaintiffs at the time of crisis but the Plaintiffs who have enjoyed all the assistance of this Defendant have filed the above suit. That there is no cause of action for the suit the cause of action shown in the plaint is illusionary and not known in law. The partition of the schedule property has taken place between the family members of the Defendants in the year 1999 itself and the Plaintiffs had knowledge of the same and did not question/object to the partition as they had received their share. That the above suit is barred by law as the suit is filed after