Chitambaresh, J.

1. A daughter questions the propriety of her Mahomedan father in having acted as her guardian in the alienation of her share in the property after she had attained puberty and married also thought was a minor. The issue needs to be resolved with reference to the exposition of Mahomedan Law by SIR DF Mulla edited by M. Hidayatullah and Arshad Hidayatullah followed by courts over decades.

2. The plaint schedule property originally belonged to Sooppy Haji who was the father of the plaintiff and defendant nos.1 and 2 under a registered deed (Document No.661/1942, S.R.O., Nadapuram). Sooppy Haji assigned his right over the property in favour of the plaintiff and defendant nos.1 and 2 under Ext.B1 sale deed dated 30.6.1957 at a time when the plaintiff and defendant no.2 were minors. Defendant no.1 who was the elder brother of the plaintiff and defendant no.2 acted as their guardian in getting executed Ext.B1 sale deed from Sooppy Haji. It was contended that defendant no.1 was holding the property as a co-owner for and on behalf of the plaintiff and defendant no.2 and hence the suit was laid for partition of one-third share.

3. Defendant no.1 contended that he had