Mr. K. Kannan, J.: - CM No. 6765-C-2015

For the reasons mentioned in the application, duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 13 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.

CM is disposed of.

RSA Nos. 2660 & 2006 of 2015

2. The appeals are against the common judgment in appeal and cross-appeal arising out of the same suit. They are disposed of by the common judgment.

3. The plaintiff who filed a suit to declare that the sale executed by the father was without legal necessity and not binding was resting his case on a contention that the properties were joint family properties. The trial Court held the property to be ancestral joint family property but finding that there was no necessity, allowed the plaintiff to assail the sale only in respect of his share. The contesting defendants preferred the appeal and sought to place on record that the great grand father of the plaintiff Bagrawat, was the original owner of half share of the property. He had three sons and one daughter and he made only one of the sons Shankar to be the beneficiary of his half share to the exclusion of others through a registered Hibanama. The reference to the Hiba had been entered in the Jamabandi of the