Patanjali Sastri, J.
1. Learned Counsel for the insolvent's Mom has argued that the share of the insolvent in the properties belonging to the Mom is not liable to be sold in insolvency for the discharge of his debts. Section 3 of the Madras Nambudri Act XXI of 1933 says that every member of an Mom shall have an equal proprietary interest in its properties. Prima facie therefore the insolvent has an interest in the Mom properties to which he is entitled' in his own right and this should, in the absence of any provision in the Act to the contrary, be available for the discharge of the debts due from him to his creditors. Mr. Krishna Aiyar relies upon Sections 5 and 23 of the Act as indicating that the interest of the insolvent in the Mom properties is not liable to be proceeded against by his creditors. But I see nothing in those provisions having the effect contended for by the learned counsel. Section 5 deals with the karnavan's power of alienation of Mom properties so as to bind the other members of the Mom and does not relate to the power of a member of the Mom to alienate his own interest. Nor does Section 23 have any bearing on the point under consideration, a it provides for partition of such properties subject to certain conditions. I am unable to spell out of these provisions any restriction on the right of the Official Assignee to bring the interest of an insolvent member of an Mom to sale on behalf of his creditors.
2. The application is dismissed.