Defendants 3 and 5 are the appellants in this second appeal which arises out of a suit for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs one-eighth share in Door No.31, Kutty Street, Nungambakkam, Madras-34. Though there was some dispute as to whether the property originally belonged to one Samuel, the grand-father of defendants 3 to 5, the matter is beyond challenge at this stage before me. The lower appellate Court has held that the property belonged to Samuel originally and nothing has been shown to me to disturb that finding. This Samuel admittedly had five sons and a daughter. The following genealogical tree will help an easy understanding of the relationship. This genealogical tree is found in the plaint. In the written statement, it is alleged by defendants 3 to 5 that their father had three more daughters by names Gnanambal, Regina and Gladis. In fact, Gnanambal has been examined as D.W.I in this case.

2. The plaintiff claimed that he was the son of Benjamin and that the first defendant was his sister. Defendants 3 to 5 who are the contesting parties are admittedly the children of John, a brother of Benjamin. The status of the second defendant, as the grand-