1. This reference to a Full Bench was occasioned to consider the applicability of the Hindu Law Doctrine of pious obligation to the Thiyyas of Calicut. The court below ruled that the doctrine has no application to them, relying on a Division Bench ruling of this Court in Dharmodayam Company v. Balakrishnan (1962 KLT. 712). The Division Bench which made the reference found force in the contention that the decision in Dharmodayam Company's case required reconsideration in view of the observations in the Supreme Court decision in Anthonyswamy v. M R. Chinnaswamy (AIR. 1970 S.C. 223).

2. The appeal arises out of a suit for partition. Defendants 2 and 3 who have filed this appeal may be described the alienees of certain items, the 2nd defendant being the mortgagee of items 1 to 5 and the 3rd defendant, the vendee (claimed also to be the lessee) of item 6. The plaintiffs 1 to 5 were the children of the 1st defendant who died pending suit, and the 6th plaintiff is their mother and the wife of the 1st defendant. Items 1 to 5 were hypothecated by Ext. B-5 dated 26121958 for a sum of Rs. 6.850/- to the 2nd defendant. A portion of item 6 was sold by Ext. B-13 dated 13-6-1958 to one