JUDGMENT

The suit for partition though decreed by the trial court was dismissed in appeal. Aggrieved, the plaintiff is in Second Appeal.

2. The plaintiff and the 1st defendant are siblings. They are the children of one Narayani Amma. Defendants 2 to 5 are the children of one Malukutty. Malukutty is the sister of Narayani Amma. The 6th defendant is the assignee of a portion of property from defendants 2 to 5.

3. The plaint schedule property has an extent of

30 cents with a building. Admittedly the property belonged to Narayani Amma and Malukutty. Narayani Amma died in the year 1941 and Malukutty died in the year 1942. The plaintiff seeks for partition and separate possession of her share.

4. The defendants contended that, after the death of Narayani Amma, the rights of the plaintiff and 1st defendant was conveyed by their father as per Ext B2 of the year 1951, in favour of Malukutty. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled for any share, is the contention.

5. The trial court held that the transfer by a minor is void and granted a decree for partition. The first appellate court relied on the provisions of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and held that Ext B2 is only a voidable do