Pandrang Row, J.

1. The only point that arises in this appeal is whether after a Marumakkathayam tarwad has been registered as impartible under Section 43 of Marumakkathayam Act (XXII of 1932), a tavazhi of that tarwad which possesses separate properties is not governed by the provisions of Chapter VI of the Act which permits a partition of such properties as if the tavazhi were a tarwad - vide Section 41 of the Act. It is clear from the Chapters V and VI that in the case of tavazhies possessing separate properties, the provisions of the two Chapters are made applicable to such tavazhies as if they were tarwads - vide Sections 37 and 41 of the Act, and the reason is obvious because where there are separate properties belonging to a tavazhi, so far as the management of the properties and their partition is concerned, there is no reason for making any difference between tavazhies possessing separate properties and tarwads. Section 41 runs as follows:

The provisions of this chapter shall apply to every tavazhi possessing separate properties as if it were a tarwad, and it is clear from Section 38 that any sub-tavazhi represented by the majority of its major members may apply for