( 1 ) THIS second appeal raises a short but important question in regard to the interpretation of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, hereinafter called "the Act".

( 2 ) THE plaintiffs, who are the appellants, instituted the suit for possession of the suit for possession of the property. It was contended that late Subbarao, the father of the 1st plaintiff and the husband of the 2nd plaintiff died undivided with plaintiffs about ten years before. After the death of Subbarao, his paternal grand-mother Narsamma, who was then living, claimed separate maintenance. The matter was referred to some mediators and consequently the parties entered into a family arrangement on 14-8-1947 under which the suit property was given to Narasamma in lieu of her maintenance during her lifetime with certain restrictions. The defendant, who is her daughter, persuaded Narasamma to execute a deed in her favour which Narasamma had no right to execute.

( 3 ) THE defendant opposed the action mainly on the ground that Narasamma had absolute rights under Section 14 of the Act, and as Narasamma settled the property in her favour, the plaintiffs have no right to claim the property.

( 4 ) THE t