Pakenham Walsh, J.

1. This is a suit by the plaintiff for partition of joint family properties and for delivery of his share. One Munusami Sah, Sankar Sah (1st defendant), Chinnasami Sah and Ponnu-sami Sah were four brothers. The 1st defendant is one of the above four who is alive. Munusami Sah had three sons and a daughter. One son Sudarsana Sah filed C.S. No. 63 of 1910, got a share and separated himself from the family; the second son Chender Sah is the 10th defendant and plaintiff is the third son. Various other members of the family are set out in the genealogical tree and it is unnecessary to particularise them further here. The plaintiff is the appellant.

2. There are only two questions in the appeal: one of fact and one of law. The one of fact is, whether the contract with the Madras Corporation was a separate business of the 1st defendant or a joint family business. The learned Judge has found on the question of fact that it is a joint-family business and I have no hesitation in agreeing with him. The family was one which traded by taking contracts, but the plaintiff alleges that this contract with the Madras Corporation was solely carried on by the 1st defendant. Parag