Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. These two connected appeals have been brought from a preliminary decree in a partition suit. One Ramachandra Rao died on 23rd February 1939, leaving him surviving his widow (plaintiff), two sons (defendants 1 and 2) and an unmarried daughter by his predeceased wife (defendant 3) and his mother (defendant 6). The sons and daughter being minors were represented by their maternal grandfather defendant 4 who was appointed as their guardian for the suit. Defendant 5 was a stranger with whom Ramachandra Rao carried on business in partnership as retailer of fancy goods under the style of Friends & Co. Soon after the death of Ramachandra Rao there were magisterial proceedings and inventories were prepared of the moveables in the house including the articles belonging to Friends & Co., which had its shop in the front rooms of the same premises. The plaintiff sued for partition and delivery of a third share of Ramachandra Raos properties which were set out in five schedules annexed to the plaint. As Ramachandra Rao died undivided from his sons, the plaintiffs right to a share could only be based on the Hindu Womens Rights to Property Act, 1937, and though the c