Plaintiff is the appellant in this second appeal. His suit for recovery of arrears of rent by sale of the kuzhikanam and other rights of the defendant-tenant in the property described in the schedule to the plaint has been dismissed by the Courts below. The property of which the rent is now claimed was leased on kuzhikanam by the karnavan of a tarwad to the predecessor-in-interest of the defendant. As the result of the decree in a suit for partition filed under the Madras Marumakkattayam Act, VII of 1933, the members of the tarwad which granted the lease became divided. Nevertheless, the plaintiff, the karnavan of the disrupted tarwad, claimed rent from the defendant on the footing that he retained his status as karnavan to represent the members of the tarwad in respect of the property of which the rent is now claimed because this property had not been partitioned among the members of the tarwad by the decree. The defendant, tenant, resisted the claim on the ground that the property had been allotted under a maintenance arrangement to a tavazhi and that he had paid the rent to the tavazhi karnavan. He also pleaded that after the partition of the tarwad the plaintiff had no