1. This is an appeal from the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Attingal in O.S.No.136 of 1954. The appellants were the plaintiffs in that suit.

2. They are the widow and son of one Vasudevan Pillai who had taken out a policy from the 3rd respondent (3rd defendant), the Bombay Life Assurance Company Limited, Bombay. The 1st respondent (1st defendant) is the father of the said Vasudevan Pillai and the 2nd respondent (2nd defendant) is his mother.

3. The policy issued by the 3rd respondent is Ext.1 dated 21-11-1950. There is a column in the policy headed "To whom the sum assured is payable." The entry in that column is "To the assured if alive at maturity, otherwise to his father S. Neelakanda Pillai the nominee". On the strength of this entry the 1st respondent contended that he was entitled to the entire amount due under the policy, & that the plaintiffs were not entitled to any share in that amount. The court below accepted the contention and dismissed the suit.

4. According to the appellants, the nomination will not affect the devolution of the amount on the death of the assured intestate and they and the 2nd defendant are entitled to share the amount equally under S.