Judgement

Consolidated Appeals (Nos. 55 and 56 of 1933) from a decree of the High Court (September 27, 1927) setting aside a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Masulipatam (November 9, 1922).

The main question in these appeals was whether the plaintiffs [respondents in appeal No. 55, and appellants in appeal No. 56] had any reversionary rights in the suit properties, and that depended on whether or not their maternal grandfather was joint in estate with the ancestors of the contesting defendants.

Law. Rep. 63 Ind. App. 397 ( 1935- 1936) Alluri Venkatapathi Raju V. Dantuluri Venkatanarasimha Raju 139

The facts appear from the judgment of the Judicial Committee.

The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit.

An appeal to the High Court (Ramesam and Cornish JJ.) was allowed, and the plaintiffs were granted a declaration that, on the death of their mother, they would be entitled to succeed to a portion of the estate claimed by them.

1936. May 7, 8, 11, 12, and 14. Dunne K.C. and Subba Row for appellants in appeal No. 55, and respondents 2-5 in appeal No. 56.

De Gruyther K.C. and Abdul Majid for respondents 1 and 2 in appeal No. 55, and appellants (plaintiffs) in appeal No. 56.

The following