Mockett, J.

1. Defendant 1 is the appellant. He is the son of one Chelamiah who died on 15fch October 1925 at a great age. Defendant 2 is the brother of defendant 1 and the plaintiff is the third brother. The following facts were stated from the bar and were accepted. In April or October 1917 - at this stage it is not necessary to be more precise about the date - the family became divided in status. In 1920, defendant 2 filed, but subsequently withdrew, a suit for partition, but on 22nd May 1921 there was a muchilika entered into between the parties with a view to dividing the property. On that there was a reference to arbitration by the plaintiff and the defendants and it is on that reference that this matter comes before this Court, having been first of all decided by the District Judge of East Godavari. That is all that is necessary at present with regard to the facts, because what is now being dealt with may be called a preliminary point. It can be shortly stated. Mr. V.V. Srinivasa Iyengar for defendant 1 has raised a point which was referred to but not decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Ramlal Hargopal v. Kishanchand (24) 11 A.I.R. 1924 . The poi