MADHAVAN NAlR J.:- This appeal raises a question of some nicety, viz., whether an alienation of tarwad property, not in conformity with the conditions laid in Sec.21 of the Travancore Ezhava Act (III of 1100) is void or voidable.

2. The facts are as follows: The suit property belonged to Valiyaveettil tarwad of plaintiff and defendants 2 to 25, governed by the Travancore Ezhava Act. It was mortgaged with possession to the predecessor of the 1st defendant on 26-10-1083, and subsequently sold to the 1st defendant on 4-12-1113 M.E. The latter alienation was by the then karanavan and some of the other members of the tarwad, but had not the written consent of all the major members of the tarwad as required by Sec.21 of the Travancore Ezhava Act. Treating it as void, the plaintiff, on behalf of the tarwad, has instituted this suit to set aside the sale and to redeem the mortgage abovesaid.

The 1st defendant contended inter alia that the suit, having been instituted more than 12 years after the execution of the impugned sale, was barred by limitation.

3. The Munsif heard the question of limitation as a preliminary issue, and held

".............a sale deed executed by the karnavan wit