Judgement

Appeal (No. 104 of 1922) from a decree of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner (April 4, 1919) affirming a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Mohanlalganj.

The suit was instituted by Narain Singh, represented by the appellants, against Avadhesh Singh, a minor represented by the respondent, to recover possession of a taluqa named Rampur Kaithaula.

The material facts appear from the judgment of the Judicial Committee.

The trial judge dismissed the suit, and that decision was affirmed (though on different grounds) upon appeal to the Court of the Judicial Commissioner. The effect of the judgments in India appears from the present judgment. The question of res judicata, one of the grounds of the decision of the trial judge was not material to the present decision; it is therefore not necessary to state the facts as to it.

1923. June 4, 5, 7. Sir George Lowndes K.C., and Kenworthy Brown for the appellants. The appellate Court rightly reversed the finding of a custom of lineal primogeniture, but erred in allowing a new defence based on the deed of 1871 and the alleged will of 1888. The limitation to Lachman Singh and "his heirs and representatives .... as provided by s. 22 of