Judgement

IN this case the issue mentioned in the judgment printed below was referred by their Lordships on the 9th day of June, 1877, to be tried by the Commissioner of Seetapore (1 Law Rep 4 Ind. App. 178). On the 13th of December, 1877, the Commissioner found that " there is no proof of any fresh act or agreement on the part of the Respondent, by which he became bound to hold the villages alluded to in the issue set in trust for the Appellant and Parbut Singh, but that they were an undivided Hindu family up to 1865, and that the joint interest extended to the whole estate then in possession, ancestral and acquired. I am bound, however, to say that the evidence shews that the acquired villages, other than the recovered ones, were the fruit of the energy and good management of the Respondent and his father, Bhawani Singh."

Leith, Q.C., and C. W. Arathoon, for the Appellant. Doyne, for the Respondent.

The judgment of their Lordships was delivered by Sir Barnes Peacock —

When this case was before their Lordships on a former occasion it was remanded with a direction to the Commissioner to try or cause to be tried by the Settlement Officer the following issue, viz., Whether the Respon