Pareed Pillay, C.J.

Plaintiff filed O.S.No. 46 of 1964 before the Sub Court, Ottapalam claiming partition. He, his younger brother (deceased Karunakara Menem) and their mother Parukutty Amma were the only members of the tavazhi when they separated from the main tarwad as per partition deed dated 18-8-1952. Sixth defendant claimed tenancy right in the property on the strength of Exts. B1 and B9. Contention of the 6th defendant that he has tenancy right in the property was found against by the trial court as well as the first appellate court.

2. The only contention of the appellant (6th defendant) is that he is entitled to benefit under S.7B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), It is his contention mat he has obtained the property as per a registered lease deed prior to 11-4-1957 from mother and brother of the plaintiff and hence he is entitled to the benefit under the Section. It is further contended by hi in that while deciding his claim the courts below considered only the fact that the lease was incompetent as the karanavan (plaintiff) was not a party to it and did not consider the bona fides of his claim. Learned counsel for the plaintif