1. Two points are raised for decision in this appeal. The first question we have to decide is whether when the two sisters Viyamma (the 1st defendant) and the deceased Peramma divided their womens estate, they did so merely with a view to convenient enjoyment, retaining the right of the survivor to take the whole on the death of one of them or whether such right of survivorship was expressly excluded by agreement between the parties. It is not denied that it was open to the sisters to do either in a manner binding between themselves. The question is one of fact and the learned Subordinate Judge has held that the right of survivorship was expressly excluded.

2. The properties originally belonged to one Perayya. He died without male issue and he had no co-parceners. His estate therefore passed to his widow Rajamma. She died 25 years ago and the estate then passed to Perayyas two daughters, Viyamma and Peramma, they taking a joint daughters estate for life. It was these ladies that divided the estate. There is no partition deed, but the division is admitted by all parties, the only dispute being whether the right of survivorship between themselves was retained or expressly give