The Hindu Succession Act supersedes all existing laws in the matter of intestate succession among Hindus and brings fundamental changes in the law of succession among Hindus. The Act's provisions, particularly Ss. 4, 6, and 8, govern the devolution of property and override established provisions in the texts of Hindu Law.

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 the property had been set apart to the indiviual share of the first defendant. They contended that plaintiffs have no right by birth. First defendant while working as the Secretary of the Bank misappropriated large amounts and for realising the same arbitration proceedings were initiated before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Palakkad. The properties belonging to first defendant were attached. Second defendant further contended that the remedy of plaintiffs is to file a Claim petition before the joint Registrar. According to them the suit is barred under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act.

4. By judgment dated 28-2-1986 the court below granted a preliminary decree for partition of the property into five equal shares and for allotment of four shares to plaintiffs. No direction was made for payment of profits. It was found that the property obtained by the first defendant in partition is joint-family property in his hands and plaintiffs who are members of joint-family are entitled to get share. Aggrieved by that decision the second defendant has come up in appeal.

5. Mithakshara Law recognises two modes of devolution of properties, survivorship and succession. The rule of survivorship applies to joint-family properties and rule of succession to properties held in absolute rights. The Hindu Succession Act has brought about fundamental and radical'changes in the Law of Succession applicable to the Hindus. From the preamble to the Act it is clear that the Act was intended to amend and codify the law relating to intestate succesion among Hindus. S.4 of the Act gives overriding application to the provisions of the Act and says:

"(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act.-

(a) any text, rule or interpretation of Hindu Law or any custom or usage as part of that law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to have effect with respect to any matter for which provision is made in this Act;

(b) any other law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to apply to Hindus in so far as it is inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in this Act."

6. By this provision of the Act all existing laws inconsistent with the Act are sought to be repealed with the result that any test, rule or interpretation of Hindu law or any custom or usage as part of law in force immediately before the commencement of the Act shall cease to have effect with respect to any matter for which provision is made in this Act. The Act intends only to effect the principles of Hindu Law to the extent to which provision has been made in the Act which abrogates or modifies the principles of Hindu Mithakshara Law. The Act does not effect the law relating to joint-family and partition of joint-family prope