1. These appeals are filed against the judgment and Decree in O.S.No. 29 of 1986 of the Sub Court, Kasaragod. A.S.No.149 of 1990 is filed by defendants 3,5 and 6, A.S. No. 196 of 1990 is filed by the plaintiff. A.S.No. 243 of 1990 is filed by the first defendant and A.S.No.299 of 1990 is filed by the second defendant. The suit was filed for partition.

2. According to the plaintiff, she is the daughter of late K.B. Sheik Yusuf Saheb. First defendant is the son of K.B.Sheik Yusuf Saheb. Defendants 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the sons of K.B.Sheik Yusuf Saheb. Seventh defendant is the daughter-in-law of Sheik Yusuf Saheb. Defendants 8 to 14 are the children of late K.Sheik Abdul Hasim and 7th defendant. All are Muslims. Defendants 12 to 14 are minors. 15th defendant is the daughter of Mariambee and wife of late Shariff.16th defendant is the son of late Mohammad Kashim Saheb and the 17th defendant is the wife of Aziz Saheb.

3. The plaintiff and defendants are related to one another as shown in the geneology given in Schedule A. K.B.Sheik Yusuf Saheb, father of the plaintiff died on 24th December 1964. Her mother Zulekhabi died on 16th February 1959. Zairunnisa sister of the plaintiff died unmarried in 1972 leaving her brothers and sisters as the only heirs and legal representatives. Sheik Abul Hasim, the eldest brother of the plaintiff died in 1983 having defendants 7 to 14, his widow and children as the legal representatives. Mariambee, elder sister of plaintiff died in 1956, leaving defendants 15 to 17 as her legal representatives.

4. The properties described in item Nos. 2 to 4 of B Schedule were acquired by Sheik Yusuf Saheb on darkast grant on different occasions. Item No.1 of the B Schedule properties belonged to the plaintiff's father and others and as per the final Decree in O.S. No.35 of 1943 of the District Munsiff, Kasaragod, the said item was allotted to his share. He obtained delivery of the same through court as per the delivery receipt dated 27th December 1948. Ever since then till his death, the said Sheik Yusuf Saheb was in direct possession and enjoyment of the said B Schedule properties. On the death of Yusuf Saheb in 1964, his estate developed on his five sons, defendants 1 to 4 and Sheik Abdul Hasim and his four daughters, plaintiff and defendants 5 and 6 and Zairunnissa. Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/14th share in the said B Schedule properties on the death of her father.

5. Zairunnisa, the younger sister of the plaintiff died in 1972 leaving five brothers and three sisters including the plaintiff. The said Zairunnisa was entitled to 1/14 share in the estate of her father. In the estate of Zairunnisa, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/13 share and each of her brothers are entitled to 2/13 share. Thus in all, the plaintiff is entitled to 14/182 shares.

6. The plaintiff detailed with regard to the shares of different persons. Then he proceeded to say as follows: The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 14 are co-owners in respect of plaint B Schedule properties. The plaintiff is in joint possession of the same. The said defendant, for and on behalf of the plaintiff and other co-owners, has been attending to the management of B Schedule properties. The second defendant was in very cordial relationship with the plaintiff till recently and it was the plaintiff who helped him for his marriage. The defendant and his wife were staying with the plaintiff very often till recently. Whatever improvements were effected in the said B Schedule properties after 1964 were effected out of the joint funds of the plaintiff and the defendants. The building in B Schedule is occupied by defendants 1 and 3 while the rest of the properties is in the occupation of the second defendant. No portion of the building is leased out to any tenant. The gross coconut income from B Schedule properties would be 3000 coconuts.

7. The plaintiff caused registered notice to be issued to the second defendant demanding partition of the estate of her father.