Ramamurti, J.-Defendants 2 to 5 have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Sub-Court, Dindigul, decreeing the plaintiffs’ suit for partition of the properties described in the Schedules A to E, attached to the plaint and also the movables and into six shares and allotment of two shares to the plaintiffs 1 and 2, and one share to the first defendant. The second defendant has also been directed to render an account of the income from the properties of the family for a period of one year, September, 1957 to September, 1958, as claimed in the plaint. The following geneological tree, shows the relationship between the parties:-Nagayasami, the second defendant, and Ayyalu, the first defendant, are brothers. The first defendant’s sons are the plaintiffs 1 and 2. The second defendant’s son is the third defendant, fourth defendant, is the wife of defendant 3, and the fifth defendant, minor Renuka is their daughter. The plaintiffs case is that the second defendant and the members of his branch and the first defendant and the members of his branch are all members of a joint Hindu family, the two branches being each entitled to a half share in all the properties, immovab

Click Here to Read the rest of this document