P. Subramonian Poti, J.

1. An interesting question is raised in second appeal No. 1134 of 1967 and that concerns the effect of a decree for partition in an earlier suit wherein plaintiff claimed 1/3 share in the suit properties. The claim for 1/3 succeeded in the earlier suit and a preliminary decree was passed for the 1/3rd followed by a final decree which is under challenge in the connected appeal, S.A. No. 1135 of 1967 at the instance of the same party. In the present suit the same plaintiff claims partition of one-half of the same properties. It is necessary to state a few facts to understand how this situation has arisen.

2. Plaint items belonged to the father of plaintiff who was the grandfather of defendants 1 and 2. The father of the plaintiff died some time prior to 1952 and thereafter the mother was in possession. The mother died intestate in 1952. Plaintiff and father of defendants 1 and 2 were the sons of the said mother who died in.1952 and besides these sons she had a daughter who is not a party to this suit. It is claimed by the plaintiff in the plaint that he was entitled to one-half by inheritance to his mother and therefore he should get a decree for that on