C.Vedachalam Pillai and the father of N.Venkatesan namely C.V.Natesapillai was also died, B schedule property therein was allotted to N.Venkatesan and therefore, the suit properties are the ancestral properties. As the deceased first plaintiff and the defendants 1 and 2 are the male members and coparceners, they are entitled to get share in the suit properties and the defendants 3 to 8 being the femal members, are not entitled to any share in the ancestral property, as they are not coparceners. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/4 share in the suit schedule properties, which were alloted as B schedule property to N.Venkatesan as per partition deed dated 09.03.1960 (Ex.D1). Accordingly, N.Venkatesan, father of the deceased first plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 8, is not entitled to execute a Will, during his life time in favour of his sons, daughters and grandson with respect to the ancestral property. If he was willing to execute such Will, he can only execute the same with regard to his 1/4 share in the suit properties. Therefore, the Will executed by N.Venkatesan with regard to the entire suit properties is not valid and it will not bind the deceased first plaintiff and after his death it will not bind the plaintiffs 2 to 5. Since the defendants 1 and 2 are in possession of the properties and getting rents from the A schedule property, they are liable to rend the accounts. Though the first plaintiff during his life time demanded for partition and rendition of
