acres for the sale consideration of Rs.2,79,175/-. Likewise, the first defendant also executed the sale deed in favour of Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation for the land allotted to him admeasuring 4.30 1/6 acres for the sale consideration of Rs.2,79,175/-. Though the plaintiffs had the respective share of 4.07 1/2 acres and 4.11 acres they executed sale deed for 4.30 1/6 acres. Therefore, the first defendant was allotted 4 acres and 56 cents. Accordingly, the compensation amount paid by the Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation shared by them and for remaining balance he can enjoy the more extent of property. The above said partition is only to avoid the dispute between their legal heirs and as such they never enjoyed the property separately except the suit property, the property which was sold out in favour of Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation and also other properties were kept vacant without cultivation. Therefore, those lands laid out into house flats and sold out. When the first defendant demanded the amount for the excess land sold out by him from the plaintiffs, the property which was allotted to the plaintiffs was picked up in favour of the first defendant before the Panchayatars. Thereafter, the plaintiffs refused to execute sale deed in favour of the first respondent as agreed by them in front of the Panchayatars. In fact, the plaintiffs also relinquished their right in favour of the first defendant in respect of the property which was intended to sell in favour of the second defendant. Only thereafter, the first defendant executed sale deed in favour of the second defendant and also handed over the possession and enjoyment of the suit property admeasuring 30 cents comprised in Survey No.302/1. Thereafter, the remaining portion of land admeasuring 38 cents comprised in R.S.No.302/2 purchased in the name of first defendant was intended to sell the same by the plaintiffs in which the plaintiffs and their sons have executed the sale deed as requested by the plaintiffs. Suppressing the said facts, the present suit is filed with false averments. When accepted the sale deed executed in favour of the second defendant and only thereafter, the sale deed executed by the first defendant in favour of the third parties as requested by plaintiffs, they are estopped from claiming the property which was sold out in favour of the second defendant. Therefore, prayed for dismissal of the suit.
