N. Kumar, J.

1. These two appeals are preferred against the common judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 2640/1988 and O.S. No. 5075/2000 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

2. O.S. No. 2640/1988 is filed by Smt. Thanamma and her daughters against Smt. Pillamma and her son Muniyallappa and the legal heirs of her another son Govindappa who are defendants 3 to 5. Defendants 6 and 7 are the daughters of Pillamma. The tenth defendant - Manjunath is the son of yet another daughter of Pillamma by name Padmamma who died prior to the filing of the suit. Defendants 8 and 9 are the daughters of the first plaintiff. Defendants 11 to 15 are the daughters of Govindappa. The other defendants are the alienees from both Muniyallappa and Govindappa.

3. The subject matter of these suits are agricultural land, garden land and grape vine yard, which are more particularly described in the schedules 'A' 'B' and 'C'. The property described in the 'B' schedule are lands situate in kaneshumari number.

4. The case of the plaintiffs is, one Arasikuttappa is the propositor. He had two sons by nam