1. Defendants 1, 2 and 7 in O.S. No.214 of 1950 on the file of the Anjikaimal District Court have brought this appeal against the preliminary decree passed on 5.4.1955 directing a division into two equal halves of an item of immovable property, namely, item 1 in Schedule A of the plaint and some among the movables mentioned in Schedule B thereof. There are as many as five items of immovable properties mentioned in Schedule A. While claiming that she was entitled to a one-half share in all those item and in all the movable properties mentioned in Schedule B, in her plaint the plaintiff proceeded to state that to avoid unnecessary controversies she was abandoning her claim over items 3 to 5 of A schedule and that she would be content with a half share in the two remaining items in that schedule and a half share of the movables. The learned Additional District Judge who heard the suit found that item 1 of A schedule was divisible into two equal halves between the plaintiff and defendant 1, that item 2 was the separate property of defendant 1 and that the plaintiff was also entitled to a half share of such of the movables in B Schedule as were proved to be really in existen