RAMASWAMI, J. :- This is an appeal preferred against the decree and Judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tanjore in O. S. No. 15 of 1947.

2. The facts are:- The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 are brothers. Defendants 4 to 11 are their sons. Defendants 12 to 17 are alienees. This family of four brothers was a leading Mirasdar family of Kunniyur. They own lands in several villages. The plaintiff was residing at Kunniyur and Kumbakonam. The first defendant was managing the lands at Perugavazhanthan. The second defendant was managing the lands in Kunniyur, Periakudi and Tiruventhurai. The third defendant was managing the lands at Agaram, Palayangudi, Manakud and Vikrapandiam. They used to send the net realisations to Kunniyur and invest them in banks at Kumbakonam and they used to lend out moneys also.

This family was also assessed to income-tax. These brothers were living amicably till 1940 and improving the patrimony left by their father and came to own 112 velis of land. In November 1940 on account of differences between the womenfolk, they agreed to become divided and prepared four lists. But as they could not proceed further as to how the allotment was to be made and they had also certain differences, they gave a muchalika to their sisters husband Sri P. S. Sivarama Ayyar, who was then aged about 60 and who was the President of the Bar Association, Negapattinam till 1950.

3. This muchalika Ex. B 102 runs as follows:-

"Whereas there is no unity amongst us and we have decided to get a division effected amongst us, whereas taking into consideration the disunity amongst us, we think that it is impossible to discuss and settle amicably all the matters relating to us without an arbitrator, and whereas we have confidence in you, who are related in equal degree to all of us that you would act as the arbitrator and settle all the matters amongst us, we have executed this muchalika, so that you will act as the sole arbitrator in the matter, consider all the matters relating to us and settle the same, and effect a division of all the common properties of our family, such as immovable, movable properties and the money-lending transactions, etc. We shall abide by the award which may be given by you." 4. This Sivarama Ayyar kept a diary of his work as an arbitrator and this is Ex. B-60 (page 129 of the printed papers). The following two entries dated 11-12-1950 and 12-12-1950 are relevant:

"11-12-1950: Arbitration muchalika is executed by the parties. They are advised to discuss and try to agree to a division of the immovables.

12-12-1950: Parties have divided the immovables into four lots - A, B, C and D - and agree that the first choice may be given to Kalyanasundaram Ayyar, the second to Rajagopala Ayyar and third to Panchapakesa Ayyar and that the list left over was to be taken by Mahadeva Ayyar. The A-list is taken by Kalyanasundaram Ayyar, the B-list by Rajagopala Ayyar and the D-list by Panchapakesa Ayyar. Mahadeva Ayyar therefore gets the C-list. Parties agree that possession of C and D lists may be taken at once and at their request, copies of C and D lists are prepared, signed by me and handed over with a note that possession may be taken by the two parties concerned at once. Regarding the A and B lists, it is stated that the actual extent of the punjas, etc., has to be ascertained. This will be done during the Christmas holidays."

5. Out of these lists Ex. B-162 (pages 134 to 137) is the C-list of properties that had fallen to the share of the second defendant. Ex. B-163 (not printed) is the list of properties that had fallen to the share of the first defendant and Ex. A-38 (pages 154 to 156) is the list of properties that had fallen to the share of the plaintiff. On each of these lists which contain merely an enumeration of the items of properties with a brief description and extents, there is an endorsement by Sivarama Ayyar who handed over the lists to each of them, e.g., in Ex. A-38 the endorsement runs as follo