Krishnan, J.

1. This suit is brought to recover with mesne profits possession of the properties described in the plaint from the possession of the defendants on the allegation that they are tar wad properties. The plaintiffs and the defendants are all members of a Marumakkatayam tar wad called "Appatta." The 1st defendant is the present karnavan of that tar wad and the other defendants also belong to the tar wad. The plaintiffs who are some of the members of the tar wad are the appellants before me. The defendants against whom reliefs are claimed in this suit are also members of a tavazhi in the tar wad called Kuttierigandi tavazhi. The lower Courts have found that though the existence of the tavazhi was denied such a tavazhi does exist as a separate body in the tar wad with a separate karnavan and owning separate properties. The members of the tavazhi claim the suit properties as theirs except items 1 to 12 and 14 which are admitted to be tar wad properties. The second appeal has been argued before me only with reference to items 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, 37 and 38 and items 1 to 6 and the improvements on items 8, 9 and 10. As regards items 27 and 23 the evidence is that they wer