This appeal relates only to the decree for costs. The plaintiffs are the appellants. They are the junior members of an Aliyasanthana family who sued to recover a sum of Rs. 15,981 as the arrears of maintenance due to them. The first defendant is the present ejamanthi of the family. She filed a written statement showing that she was not in possession of the family properties or the income from them though she became manager on 19th February, 1948, and that therefore she had not been in a position to maintain the plaintiffs, or herself from oat of the family income. Defendants 2 to 6 contested the suit and the 2nd defendant filed a written statement contending that the suit was filed in collusion with the 1st defendant and to saddle the family with a large liability, that as the plaintiffs were living with the 1st defendant who was maintaining them for the period during which the claim was made, the plaintiffs were not entitled to separate maintenance, that the claim for maintenance was excessive. Issues were framed. The first issue was whether the plaintiffs were not entitled to maintenance on the ground that they had been maintained by the 1st defendant who was ejamanthi