Judgment

MUDHOLKAR, J. : This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the High Court of Bombay affirming the decree of the District Judge, Thana, setting aside the decree in favour of plaintiff-appellant.

2. The relevant facts which are no longer in dispute are these : The plaintiff s family are grantees of the Patilki Watan of some villages in Umbergaon taluka of the Thana District of Maharashtra, including the village of Solsumbha, Maroli and Vavji. Defendants 2 to 4 also belong to the family of the plaintiff. The plaintiff represents the senior most branch of the family while the defendants 2 to 4 represent other branches. The dispute with which we are concerned in this appeal relates to the Patilki of Solsumbha. Under the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 (Bombay Act No. III of 1874) the person who actually perform the duty of a hereditary office for the time being is called an Officiator. It is common ground that the Officiator had been selected from the branch of the plaintiff from the year 1870 in which year the propositus Krishna Rao Pimputkar died. After his death he was succeeded by his eldest son Vasudev upon whose death in 1893 his eldest son Sadashiv was the