The plaintiff is the son of one Ramachari who died in 1959. The second and third defendants are his brothers. The plaintiff sued for a partition of his one-fourth share in the suit property, which he claimed belonged to the joint family of which the members were the plaintiff, defendants 2 and 3, and the fourth defendant. The fourth defendant is the first cousin of Ramachari, the plaintiff’s father. It appears that the property in question was sold by Ramachari to the fourth defendant in 1934. ‘According to the plaintiff, the property had fallen to Ramachari by survivorship, and the father Ramachari could not sell the property except for necessity or benefit or for the discharge of any antecedent debt, none of which obtains in the case. The sale in 1934 was an oral sale, which, however, was confirmed by a written document executed in 1957 by Ramachari, the plaintiff’s father, and defendants 2 and 3, his brothers. It may also be stated that the plaintiff was born in 1939, long after the impugned sale of 1934. But plaintiff claims that he has nevertheless the right to question the alienation, his brothers, the second and third defendants, having been in existence on the da