This revision raises the question as to the scope of the jurisdiction of the Court under section 4 of the Partition Act (IV of 1893):

"Whether a sharer can claim to buy out a stranger-transferee of a share in a family dwelling "house, in a suit for partition instituted not by the stranger-transferee but by a member of the family?"

The facts of the case and the proceedings that have led to the controversy may be briefly set out. The revision petitioner is the 3rd defendant in a suit for partition of three items of house properties. One Pancha Pillai and the 3rd defendant in the suit were brothers. The first defendant is the widow of Pancha Pillai and the second defendant, their son. The 4th defendant is a purchaser from the 2nd defendant of the western half-share in item (3) of the suit properties, a family dwelling house, under a registered sale deed Exhibit B-3 dated 12th November, 1956. There is some evidence that the two brothers attempted a division of the properties without reference to their mother Deivanai Ammal and she thereupon filed the suit O.S. No. 125 of 1959 on the file of the District Munsif, Turaiyur, and it is out of that the present revision arises. Deivan