1. Though the second appeal was filed by three of the seven plaintiffs, two of them have subsequently died; and the sole surviving appellant is the third plaintiff. The question for consideration in the second appeal is what is the law of inheritance that obtains among the Valans of Travancore, whether makkathayam or marumakkathayam. The plaintiffs are the marumakkathayam heirs, whereas the contesting defendants the makkathayam heirs, of the acquirer of the property in dispute. The trial court, though inclined to hold that the law applicable to the community was makkathayam, held that the documents relating to the suit property indicated marumakkathayam. The lower appellate court, on the other hand, held that the law applicable was makkathayam; and that the indication in the documents contra was not conclusive.

2. Since this community did not have members having any considerable property, precedents are rare. The only decision available is Paily Thommen v. Ayyappan Kutty Konnunni (1955 KLT. 564) relating to the Valans of Cochin. One Judge of the Travancore-Cochin High Court has held therein that the Valans of Cochin follow a mixed form of inheritance, while the Arayans o