1. The short question arising for consideration in this Second Appeal is whether in the facts and circumstances of the acquisition made by two brothers Kandu and Raman who were followers of the Hindu Mitakshara Law in their joint names is joint family property or joint self acquisition?

2. The brief facts necessary for disposing of the appeal are as follows.

3. Deceased Kandu and Raman were the only sons of one Kelunny. They were admittedly followers of the Hindu Mitakshara Law. Kandu and Raman acquired the plaint schedule property along with other items of properties on lease hold right. Later they purchased the intermediary rights also. Subsequently they divided the property between themselves executing Ext. Ext. Al partition deed dated 4-2-1942. The plaint schedule property was allotted to the deceased Raman under Ext. Al exclusively with full rights of alienation. Raman and his wife died leaving their two children Madhavi and Aravindakshan about 14 years before the suit. Madhavi also died about 12 years before the suit. The first plaintiff is the husband of Madhavi and plaintiffs 2 and 3 are Madhavi's minor children. The defendants are the wife and children of Aravind