JUDGMENT

1. This second appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs in O.S. No.505 of 2008. The suit is laid for partition of one item of immovable property. Broadly, it is the daughters' suit for partition against their father and brothers claiming a share in the ancestral property as coparceners. They were successful before the trial Court, and obtained a preliminary decree for partition of 1/5 share each in the suit property, whereas before the first Appellate Court in A.S.No.57 of 2021, which the defendants had preferred, the plaintiffs suffered a reversal of fortune and lost their suit. Hence, this appeal. Parties would now be referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

Facts :

2.1 The quintessential facts disclosed in the pleadings are:

a) The first defendant is the father of defendants 2 and 3 and also the plaintiffs. While the plaintiffs are his daughters, the defendants 2 and 3 are the sons of the first defendant.

b) The suit property came to be allotted to the share of the first defendant in a partition between him and his brother vide Ext.A1 dated 01.09.1986.

c) Contending that the properties allotted to the first defendant under Ext.A1 partition are ancestral in character, th