1. The following genealogy shows the relationship between the parties to this dispute.

Anantbhat died on 12-11-1924. His son Dadbhat had gone out of the joint family by adoption before the death of Anantbhat. Vasudeo had predeceased Anantbhat and he died in 1907. Harbhat the eldest son was alive at the date of the death of Anantbhat. Anantbhat held at the time of his death several properties two out of which were S. Nos. 110 and 111.

After the death of Anantbhat there was a partition of some of the joint family properties. But S. Nos. 110 and 111 were not divided because S. No. 111 was a Dharmadaya property, and it was assumed that the Vat Hukums which were in operation in the former Kolhapur State would not permit partition of that property. S. No. 110 was regarded as accretion of S. No. 111 and therefore not liable to partition.

In 1929 the State Government issued a Vat Hukum whereby the Dharmadaya properties were regarded not as Inam properties, but as Rayatava properties and therefore partible. The plaintiff who is the son of Vasudeo filed Suit No. 328 of 1942 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Hatkanangale for a half share in S. Nos. 110 and 111 on the footing that