P. SATHASIVAM, J.

The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 7179 of 1977, on the file of the VIth Assistant judge, City Civil Court, Madras, are the appellants in the above appeal. They filed the said suit for directing the defendants to render proper accounts for the assets kept and left by A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu, since deceased on November 13, 1976, and for a decree for declaring the properties in the plaint schedule as joint family properties of the plaintiffs.

The case of the plaintiffs is as follows :

One Ramaswamy Naidu was the father of Rengiah Naidu, Bangaru Naidu, Janakiram Naidu and Muthukrishna Naidu. Rengiah Naidu was the father of the plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2, grand father of plaintiffs Nos. 3 and 4. Bangaru Naidu was the father of plaintiffs Nos. 5, 7, 8 and 9 and husband of the sixth plaintiff. Ramaswamy Naidu died without any property. Janakiram Naidu earned enormous wealth during his lifetime and died issueless in 1955. His wife also died in 1956. The plaintiffs are the legal heirs. The properties left behind Janakiram Naidu were enjoyed by the other members of the joint family. Items Nos. 1 to 5 in para. 3 of the plaint, i.e., agricultural lands 3-13 acres at Kancheepuram, house bearing Door No. 7-A, Namalwar Street, Big Kancheepuram, house property bearing Door Nos. 9 and 11, Narayanan Street, Madras, and cash amounts were taken by the members of the joint family and under the power of attorney given by the other members of the family, A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu was managing the properties. He died on November 13, 1976. He was employed at the Official Trustee's Office, High Court, Madras, and he resigned his job in or about June 1, 1957, and he did not get any provident fund, gratuity or pension. The house properties were sold and the sale proceeds were kept by A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu. The said assets are not self-acquired properties of A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu. The amounts kept in bank deposits were transferred in the name of the defendants either by nomination or under either or survivor accounts. A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu has no power to do so. The defendants have influenced A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu by illegal and improper means and committed fraud and deception on A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu and transferred his bank accounts in their name. Only on rendering proper accounts, the plaintiffs would be able to know. The plaintiffs, who are the legal heirs are entitled to get the assets left by A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu.In the written statement filed by the defendants it is contended that the allegations that A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu was managing the entire properties left by Janakiram Naidu and the assets kept by Muthukrishna Naidu are the income from the properties of D. Janakiram Naidu are all baseless and denied. The plaintiffs are not the legal representatives and they are entitled to get the assets left by A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu. It is further contended that the said Muthukrishna Naidu lost his wife long prior to his retirement. So, he was looked after only by the defendants. Whatever may be, he was investing the same and he was expressing to the defendants that he has not been cared for or looked after or enquired about by any of his relations including the plaintiffs. The savings, earnings and moneys from other income of A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu has nothing to do with the income of joint family property as these defendants understood that only the joint family property in which A. D. Muthukrishna Naidu was living. He died at the advanced age of 80 years. In the last few years prior to his death, he was expressing that he must in duty bound and according to his consciousness and free will and pleasure uninfluenced by any considerations excepting that of the gratitude he had to show for the service rendered by the defendants in attending to his comforts and looking after him as their father and father-in-law he will set apart portions of his investments in favour of the defendants and in pursuance thereof, the su