Kumar, J.

This is the plaintiff’s second appeal against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court which has dismissed the suit for partition after setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court which had decreed the suit.

2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

3. The plaintiff is the son of the first defendant Boregowda through his fourth wife Chikkathayamma. Second defendant Krishnappa is the son of Boregowda through his second wife Smt. Jayamma. Basamma, Sakamma and Boramma, defendants 3 to 5 are the daughters of Boregowda through his third wife Devamma.

4. The case of the plaintiff is he and defendants constitute a Hindu Undivided Family. All the suit schedule properties are joint family properties. First defendant is the Kartha of the joint family. Plaintiff is in joint possession of the suit schedule properties as co-parcener along with the defendants. As it is not possible for him to continue any longer in the joint family he sought for his share in the suit schedule properties.

5. The first defendant filed the written statement. He contended that the plaintiff is not his son a