This second appeal raises an important and interesting point of law regarding the meaning and bearing of section 4 of the Partition Act. The facts are briefly these.

The appellant, Krishna Pillai, is the mother’s sister’s son of the first defendant Parukutty Ammal of Nagaram Amsom, Kozhikode taluk. Parukutty Ammal and her sister, Thangammal, were living in the suit house, as tenants-in-common having inherited it from their mother, and had not divided it. On 29th August, 1940, Krishna Pillai, bought the half share of Thangammal in that house and obtained a decree for partition of his half share. Parukutty filed an application under section 4 of the Partition Act to buy out Krishna Pillai’s share. Krishna Pillai contended that the house in question did not belong to "an undivided family," as Parukutty and Thangammal were sisters in a Mitakshara family, and so would belong to different families, and not to one joint family or coparcenary, and that he himself, though an alienee, was "a member of the family" and could not be deemed to be "not a member of the family," under section 4, and that an order under section 4, giving the right to Parukutty to buy out his share and givin