1. We are of opinion that the property which devolved upon the plaintiff's father on the death of his brother, Gurumurthi, was the separate property of the plaintiff's father and not ancestral property. The inheritance was from a collateral relation and not from an ancestor.' The present case in our opinion is not governed by the judgment of the Privy Council in Venkayyamma Garu v. Venkataramanayyamma Bahadur Garu 25 M.k 678; but by the principle of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Karuppai Nachiar v. Sankaranarayanan Chetty 27 M.k 300, where it was held (page 311) that the maternal uncle from whom the inheritance devolved was not an ancestor.' The law is thus stated at page 344 of Mayne's Hindu Law,' seventh edition, published after the judgment of Privy Council in Venkayyamma Garu v. Venkataramanayyamma Bahadur Garu 25 M.k 678: Hence all property which a man inherits from a direct male ancestor, not exceeding three degrees higher than himself, is ancestral property, and is at once held by himself, in co-parcenary with his own issue. But where he has inherited from a collateral relation, as for instance from a brother, nephew, cousin or uncle, it is not ancestral property; consequently his own descendants are not co-parceners in it with him.' This second appeal is dismissed with costs.