While dismissing second appeal No. 1016 of 1945 Raghava Rao, J., granted leave for a further appeal as against the 8th respondent therein and refused leave as against the 5th respondent. Under those circumstances the appellant has preferred the above Letters Patent Appeal against the 8th respondent in the second appeal who was the 13th defendant in O.S. No. 23 of 1942 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge’s Court of Madurai out of which these proceedings have arisen.

The plaintiff-appellant is the eldest son of the first defendant whose other sons are defendants 2 to 4 and they are members of a joint Hindu family. The suit was one for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff’s share in the joint family properties. The 13th defendant, who is the contesting respondent both in the second appeal and in this Letters Patent Appeal, was impleaded as an alienee of certain joint family properties and the plaintiff claimed his share in those properties as well. The 13th defendant’s contention, which alone need be noted at this stage, is that under a valid decree and execution-sale against the first defendant representing the joint family, she has purchase