PADMANABHAN, J:- Second defendant is the appellant. O. S. No. 2 of 1973 before the Sub Court, Alleppey was filed by the plaintiff for dissolution of partnership and settlement of accounts. The Sub Judge allowed the suit granting dissolution of partnership and ordering settlement of accounts. Hence this appeal.

2. A brief history of the litigation may help us in understanding the facts and controversies. The parties are followers of the Hindu Law. First defendant is the father and defendants 2 to 6 are his sons. Among them, some died after the suit. 9th defendant is the wife of the 5th defendant and defendants 7 and 8 and the plaintiff are their sons. Defendants 10 to 14 are the daughters of defendants 5 and 9.

3. In the year 1124, the first defendant executed Ext. B1 settlement deed by which some of the properties were given to defendants 2 to 6. The joint family properties were divided between defendants 1 to 6 under Ext. A1 in 1955. An oil mill alone was kept in common. There was a provision store by name "M. R. Venkateswara Prabhu and M. V. Surendranatha Prabhu", which was conducted as a joint family concern. That business was also divided under Ext.A1 though there was so