4.Perusal of record discloses that the suit property comprised in S.No.222/4 was originally owned by one Chithrakudumban, who has three daughters namely, Chinnapillai, Karuppayee and Meenatchi. The said Chithrakudumban who is the owner of the suit property in S.No.222/4 measuring 1 acre and 48 cents, executed a registered will on 01.10.1943, bequeathing half share in the suit property in S.No.222/4 in favour of his daughter Karuppayee and her husband Chinnandi and 1/4 share each in respect of his daughters, Chinnapillai and Meenatchi. After the death of Chithrakudumban, the above said will came into force and the suit property was divided as per the will and given to the beneficiaries of the will. Thereafter, during UDR survey, the suit property was subdivided into S.Nos.222/4A, 222/4B, 222/4C and 222/4D and in respect of S.No.222/4A, instead of giving patta in favour of Karuppayee, it was wrongly given to Meenatchi and Ramachandran who is the son of Karuppayee. The said Meenatchi by a will dated 27.08.1987 bequeathed S.No.222/4A in favour of her grand daughter Leelavathi and through her, the respondents 1 and 2/plaintiffs purchased the same. Thereafter, S.No.222/4A was sub divided into S.No.222/4A1 and S.No.222/4A2 and change of patta was also obtained by the plaintiffs. While so, a case under Section 468, 471, 473 and 120(B) IPC, was registered against the revision petitioner and Ramachandran, son of Karuppayee, stating that they along with others created forged documents in respect of the land in S.No.222/4A and sold the same. In this regard, FIR dated 18.06.2013 filed against the revision petitioner and others has been marked as Ex.B13. The arrest report dated 18.06.2013 in respect of the arrest of the revision petitioner and Ramachandran, son of Karuppayee, has been marked as Ex.B14.
