J U D G M E N T

The 1^st appellant is the plainti permanent prohibitory injunction and fixation of boundary. The 1^st appellant has been concurrently non-suited by the courts below because she failed to substantiate the claim for fixation of boundary.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:-

The plaint A schedule property initially belonged to the twin thavazhi namely Thottoli and Kappacheri Thottolil and the said property having a larger extent with a house was kept in common as per a Partition Karar No.2249/1122 M.E of SRO Chokli. The total extent so kept in common was 1.01 acres, situated in R.S No.93/3. Out of 1.01 Acres, 40½ cent was given to the 1^st defendant in 1949 and 29 ½ cents to one Kumba Amma, the paternal grand mother of defendants 4 and 5, by the then karanavar of the thavazhi. The balance extent