A.S.No. 336 of 1984 is by defendants 1. 2 and 4 and AS.No.389 of 1984 is by 3rd defendant against the preliminary decree and judgment.

2. The facts in brief are as follows:

The suit property belongs to the. joint family of the plaintiff and defendants. Sitarama Manolithaya had two sons Krishna Manolithaya and Subraya Manolithaya. As per Ext.A-1 partition deed of 1933 Krishna Manolithaya's branch obtained the 'B' Schedule in the said partition. Second defendant is the widow of Krishna Manolithaya. Plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 are his children. The 5th defendant is the daughter of a deceased daughter of Krishna Manolithaya. Plaintiff alleged that the plaint 'A' schedule properties belong to the family and the 'B' schedule properties forms kumki and lagthi to the 'A' schedule properties that they were obtained on dharkhast in the names of the members of the family and hence they are partible properties. Plaintiff also alleged that the plaint' C schedule immovables also belong to the family. According to the plaintiff on the coming into force of the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act 1975 (Act 30 of 1976) all members of the joint family became tenants-in-com