Horwill, J.

1. Members of a tarwad entered into a rather unusual partition agreement under which the tarwad property was divided into four lots. The one with which we are concerned fell to the share of a mother, plaintiff 1, and her son, the defendant. Plaintiff 1 had three daughters and a son; but the daughters separated themselves from their mother and entered into the other groups. After the partition, plaintiff 1 transferred her interest in the property that fell to the share of herself and the defendant, to plaintiff 2, one of her divided daughters. The question for decision in the Courts below was whether it was permissible for the mother and the son to hold the property jointly. If so, then it was presumed that they could not divide the property and that the defendant was entitled to oppose the transfer of his mothers share to plaintiff 2. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs. Much of the argument of the learned Counsel for the appellants is based on Moithiyan v. Ayissa AIR1928Mad870 followed in Ramunni v. Kunhayan AIR1935Mad125 in which it was held that if property was given to certain members of a tavazhi, they could not hold it as a tavazhi. In Moithiyan v.