JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal is at the instance of plaintiffs who got a preliminary decree for partition of plaint schedule items Nos.1 and 2 which was reversed by the first appellate court on the ground that the suit is bad for partial partition. According to the appellants schedule properties along with other items were acquired by respondent No.2/defendant No.1, their mother in a family partition as per Ext.B1, partition deed of 1116. On 26.6.1979 respondent No.2 assigned item No.1 in favour of respondent No.1/defendant No.2 as per Ext.A1, assignment deed as if that property absolutely belonged to her while actually it was property of the tavazhi consisting of appellants and respondent No.2. At the time of Ext.A1, appellant No.1 was a major but she is not a party in that assignment deed. Appellant Nos.2 to 5 were minors but neither were they represented in the assignment deed nor sanction of the court obtained for the transfer as required under law. Appellants claimed that assignment does not bind their right, interest or title in the suit properties, wanted a declaration that suit properties belonged to their tavazhi, to set aside Ext.A1, sale deed, recover possession of plaint s