Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. This is a suit for partition. The plaintiff is the son of defendant 1 by his first wife. Defendants 2 and 60 are his sons by the second wife. The plaintiff was born on 4th August 1908. He instituted the suit through his next friend on 3rd October 1922. He attained his majority on 4th August 1926, and elected to continue the suit on 20th August 1926. Defendant 60 was born to defendant 1 on 4th August 1925 and was added as a party to the suit.

2. One of the questions in this case is, what is the share which the plaintiff is entitled to? If the rights of the plaintiff are to be determined as on the date of the plaint he would be entitled to one-third, but if it is to be determined as on the date when he elected to continue the suit or as on the date of the preliminary decree for partition in this case, he would be entitled to one-fourth. The lower Courts took the view that the plaintiff must be deemed to have been a member of an undivided family till he attained majority and elected to continue the suit, and he can only be given such share as he would be entitled to according to the state of the family on that date, and the family on that date consisted