Kumaraswami Sastri, J.

1. The 2nd defendant is the appellant before us. He claims to be an illatom son-in-law of one Ramanna. Ramanna died in 1901, leaving two sons, Sanyasi and Appalaswami, and three daughters, Appanna. Nilamma, and Ammanna. Sanyasi died a few months after his father in the year 1902. Appalaswami died in 1918 leaving the plaintiff in this suit, his widow.

2. The 2nd defendant, who is the appellant before us first married Appanna, the eldest daughter of Ramanna, and after she died he married Ammanna, another daughter of Ramanna, who is the third defendant in the suit. Ramannas widow is the 1st defendant in the suit.

3. The case for the plaintiff is that, on the death of Sanyasi the properties of the family devolved on her husband Appalaswami, and after Appalaswamis death she is solely entitled to them and she sues for the recovery of these properties. The 2nd defendant, on the other hand, contended that he was the illatom son-in-law of Ramanna, that he lived with Ramanna and helped him in the acquisition of the properties, that on the death of Appanna he married her sister Ammanna and continued to live in the family, and that Appalaswami died in 1918, leaving