Aruna 'the shares of the three brothers were chala and Rs. 7,200 odd to Manicka, these · defined and elaborate calculations were two sums aggregating to the Rs. 18,000 made. This contention is opposed to the odd mentioned above. Passing here for -very clear and unambiguous recitals of a moment, what does this arrangement /Ex. A and does not require serious notice. show ? The sums to be paid were unequal The argument pressed upon us here is and were determined with reference to nthat although as between Arunachala and the other allotments made. This, far from Manicka there was a separation in respect showing that Arunachala and Manicka · of the other assets of the family, they intended to remain joint, shows quite the must be treated as having retained their opposite. Then follows the recital already ·joint status in regard to the outstandings adverted to which clinches the matter. jointly allotted to them. That such a Referring to the Rs. 80,000 odd outstand result can be brought about, there can be ings, the document goes on to say (as men mo question; but the point to decide is, is tioned above) that they shall be collected "that the effect of the document ? In and divided between the two brothers. In 5

AIR 1922 PC 201

All India Reporter, Privy Council

Privy Council

India

Cases Referring to this Case