were allotted certain properties including the property mentioned in the schedule 'A' to the suit. Similarly, the plaintiff No.2 was allotted certain properties, which were described in schedule 'B' to the suit. They claimed that they were in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the properties allotted to their shares and the khatha of the house properties allotted to their share was transferred to their respective names. They alleged that defendant No.1, defendant No.2 and the husband of plaintiff No.1 did not get their names entered in the revenue records in respect of the agricultural properties described in the suit. Taking advantage of this, they sold certain properties including the properties allotted to the share of Smt. Nanjamma and purchased certain other properties in their individual names. The husband of plaintiff No.1 expired on 21.11.2004 leaving behind him, the plaintiff No.1 and her six children and thus, the plaintiff No.1 became the kartha of her family. The plaintiff No.1 claimed that she demanded defendant No.1 to partition the suit properties, which was however, not considered. Consequently, she filed an application on 11.04.2005 before the defendant No.5 for change of the revenue records in respect of 'A' schedule properties. Similarly,
