Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The suit has been brought on the allegation that the plaintiffs deceased husband and the 1st defendant became divided and that the plaintiff is, therefore, entitled to her husbands share. It is also alleged that subsequent to the division the two brothers carried on business in partnership and the plaintiff on that footing claims an account of the partnership business. These mainly are the reliefs that the plaintiff has prayed for and the learned Subordinate Judge has found on these two points that tee plaintiffs claim has been made out.

2. The facts may be briefly stated. There were three brothers: Annamalai, Arunachala, the plaintiffs husband and Manicka, the 1st defendant. They entered into a partition arrangement embodied in Ex. A, which covers 40 pages in print: That is a very elaborate document and the items allotted to each of the three individuals have been set out in great detail. Hence lands, outstandings, jewels, and all descriptions of property have been partitioned and adjustments have been made to equalise shares. The point, however, that has given rise to some controversey is that so far as certain outstandings amounting to Rs. 80,000 od