Bhagwati, J.

1. These three appeals raise a common question of law whether the Hindu residents of the North Kanara pistrict are governed by the Madras school of Hindu law or the Bombay school of Hindu law.

2. One Narayan, a haveek Brahmin of North Kanara district, died leaving him surviving two SODS Narasinha Putta. Narasinha, Putta effected a severance of joint status inter $e. Putta had three grandsons, Timmanna, Shankar Venkappa, in 1915 there was a partition between Venkappa on the one hand Timmanna Shankar on the other. Timmanna Shankar contitued joint inter se and Shankar died leaving him surviving his widow Kamali. Timmannft thereafter became the sole surviving coparcener of the joint family he died in 1936 leaving behind him no nearest heir but the widow Kamali, of his brother Shankar. After the death of Timmanna. aa aforesaid the name of Kamali was entered in the record of rights as his heir she took possession of all the properties, Kamali continued to enjoy the properties until her death in 1989. After her death Yenkanna, the deft who belonged to Narasinhas branch of the joint family, got his name entered into the record of rights on 12-6-1939. T