PK. Balasubramanyan, J.

This appeal is against a final decree for partition. It is filed by defendant No. 26 in the suit. Defendant No. 26 was originally a tenant of building situate in the decree schedule property. Thereafter he acquired an assignment of the rights of one of the co-owners of the property. Thus in addition to the leasehold he acquired a fraction of the reversion. The suit was filed for partition thereafter. The plaintiff claimed allotment of one out of eighteen shares. Defendant No. 26 filed a written, statement contending that he had purchased the share of defendant No. 9 for consideration and that therefore he was a co-owner of the property. The plaintiff was not entitled to the entire rent of the building. There were nineteen shares in the family including the deceased member and the plaintiff was entitled to only one out of nineteen shares. Defendant No. 9, his assignor was entitled to one out of nineteen shares and the other deceased member was entitled to one out of five shares in one out of nineteen shares. Defendant No. 26, as assignee of defendant No. 9 was entitled to six out of ninety five shares. Defendant No. 26 prayed fro allotment of the s