Lord Thankerton. -

In this appeal there has been no appearance for the respondents; but Mr. Khambatta, on behalf of the appellant, has presented the case with the fairness and candour which we have become accustomed to expect from him. He has confined his argument to one point only, because he, naturally, appreciates the difficulty arising from the fact that there were concurrent findings to the effect that the present trust was a trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature within the meaning of S. 92, Civil PC.

The only point made by him, as I understood, was this: that he found in the judgment of the Chief Court an inconsistency in the language, which suggested in one sentence that they were following exactly the terms of the compromise which had been entered into by the parties in a litigation five years or so before the date of the judgment, and that in fact the scheme approved by them materially departs from the terms of the compromise, particularly as regards the vesting of the property of the idol.

It is clear from the judgment of the trial Judge that he, like the Chief Court, found that there was no sufficient fault or breach of trust on the part of t