MANJAYA MUDALI Vs. SHANMUGA MUDALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The third defendant, a member of a Hindu family, conveyed his one-fifth share in certain joint family properties in 1891 by Exhibit I. That interest has now vested in the first defendant, his father. Two of his brothers died, and in 1904 the third defendant again transferred all his interest by Exhibit A. At that time, on the footing that he was a co-parcener, his interest amounted to one-third. The plaintiff has acquired the rights conveyed by Exhibit A and he now seeks to recover possession.

(2.) The Subordinate Judge has held that the plaintiff is on titled to a two-fifteenths share of the properties, that is the difference) between one-third and one-fifth; and this is an appeal against that decision.

(3.) The first question that is argued before us is that by the transfer in 1894 the joint tenancy was put an end to and the third defendant s first alienee became a tenant in common with the other co-parceners so far as the property alienated was concerned and that therefore by the death of the other co-parceners no interest accrued to him by survivorship; and for this the decisions of Benson and Miller, JJ., in Srinivasa Sundara Thathachariar v. Krishnasawmy J.yengar (1912) 15 I.C., 354 and of Benson and Sundara Ayyar, JJ., in Subba Row v. Ananthanarayana Aiyar are relied upon, These judgments follow the opinion of Krishna Swami Ayyar, T. in Chinnu Pillai v. Kalimuthu Chetti (1912) I.L.R., 35 Mad., 47 (F.B.).