1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.4/1984 of Sub Court, Irinjalakkuda is the appellant herein. The suit was one filed by the plaintiff for partition of the plaint schedule properties and allotment of her share in the plaint schedule properties with the following allegations:

The plaint schedule properties originally belonged to deceased Velandi, Choyi Kunju and Ayyappan Kunju and they were their self acquired properties and ancestral properties. The parties belonged to Arayan community and as per the custom prevailing in the community of Arayans, if one person dies, his properties will devolve upon his sons and daughters equally. So the plaint schedule properties have to be divided into 13 equal shares and plaintiff and defendants 1, 2 and 6 to 13 are entitled to get one such share and defendants 3 and 4 are entitled to get one such share, which their predecessor Gopalakrishnan is entitled to. The 1/13th share of the 9th defendant (wrongly mentioned as 13th defendant in the plaint) has to be allotted to the 14th defendant as he had obtained the right of the 9th defendant in OS.No.8/1979 of Sub Court, Alleppey. Though the plaintiff approached the defendants for partition, they were not amenable for the same. Thereafter she sent a lawyer notice on 6.7.1979 requesting the defendants to partition the property and allottment of one such share to her. But the defendants sent a reply with false allegations and also contended that there was an earlier partition and by virtue of the partition, the plaintiff or other defendants were not having any separate share and supporting defendants are not entitled to get any relief. So the plaintiff filed the above suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties and allottment of 1/13th share to her with past and future profits from the defendants.

2. Defendants 1 to 4 filed a joint written statement contending as follows: The suit is not maintainable.

The plaintiff is not entitled to get any right or share in the plaint properties. The aforesaid Velandi, Choyi Kunju and Ayyappan Kunju were the sons of deceased Ayyappan and Ayyappan had got five daughters also by name Chakkipennu, Kurumbakutty, Kunhipennu, Kochukarumba and Kothakutty. On the death of Ayyappan, his properties devolved on his three sons only and daughters of Ayyappan did not get any right in his properties. The daughters of Ayyappan are not the members of Kozhikparambil Tharavadu. The parties to the suit was Arayans and the law applicable to them is Hindu Mitakshara Law. Before coming into force of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the aforesaid three sons of Ayyappan died and defendants 1 and 2 and deceased Gopalakrishnan, the husband of the 3rd defendant, and father of the 4th defendant are the sons and defendants 11 to 13 are the daughters of Choyi Kunhu. Deceased Ayyappan Kunhu got four sons, who are defendants 5 to 8, and two daughters, who are the plaintiff and the 9th defendant. Since Hindu Mitakshara Law is applicable to the parties to the suit, defendants 1 to 8 effected partition of the properties as per Partition Deed No.77/1972 dated 6.1.1972 and defendants 1 to 4 formed themselves a sub tharavadu. Thereafter defendants 1 to 4 were individually separated as per the partition effected between them. The parties to the partition deed of 1972 have taken possession of the properties and the plaintiff and the 9th defendant were aware of these facts. Defendants 1 to 4 effected partition as per Partition Deed No.1884/1972 dated 11.12.1972 and their properties were partitioned. The suit properties did not belong to said Velandi, Choyi Kunhu and Ayyappan jointly. The suit properties are properties of the tharavadu. The daughters did not get any right over the properties of their parents as far as the Arayan community is concerned. So the plaintiff is not entitled to question the legal validity of the partition deed effected in the year 1972 and properties cannot be re-partitioned. The 14th defendant did not get any decree against