V. Ramasubramanian, J.

Aggrieved by the preliminary decree for partition granted in favour of the mother and daughters, the sons have come up with the above regular appeal.

2. Heard Mr. Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants 1 to 5 and 9 to 12, Mr. R.A. Chary, learned counsel appearing for the appellants 6 to 8 and 13 to 15, and Mr. P. Raja Sripathi Rao, learned counsel, representing Mr. G. Tirupathi Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. The 1st respondent (who is now no more) was the wife of one A. Ganapathi. She along with her daughters, who are respondents 2 to 5 (2nd respondent in the appeal died and their legal heirs are respondents 6 to 11) filed a suit in O.S.No.109 of 2001 for partition and separate possession of the 1/10th share of each one of them in the suit schedule properties. The appellants 1 to 5 were the defendants in the suit. The appellants 3 and 4 having died during the pendency of the appeal, their legal representatives have been brought on record as respondents 6 to 8 and 9 to 12 respectively.

4. The case of the plaintiffs in the suit was that the 1st plaintiff was the wife, the plaintiffs 2 to 5 are