An important question on Hindu Law arises in this appeal. The question is whether property obtained by a Hindu in partition of joint-family properties constitutes his separate and individual property or the properties of the joint-family consisting of himself, his wife, sons and daughters.

2. Plaint schedule property belongs to one Mallu, father of Pazhanimala and grand-father of first defendant. Pazhanimala died in 1963. This property along with other properties were partitioned among his sons in the year 1965. The properties were shown in the B schedule to the partition deed were set apart to the share of first defendant. Plaintiffs are the children of the first defendant born in his wife Visalakshy. The parties are Ezhavas of Chittur Taluk governed by the Hindu Mithakshara Law as modified by custom. Plaintiffs claimed four out of five shares in the property alleging that the property belongs to the joint-family constituted by the first defendant and his children.

3. No written statement was filed by the first defendant. The second defendant, the Secretary of a Co-operative Bank filed written statement contending that plaintiffs are not entitled to claim any share since