( 1 ) ). The second defendant is the appellant. At an action laid at the behest of the first respondent-plaintiff, the trial Court granted a preliminary decree in his favour for half of the plaint schedule property subject to refund half of the sale consideration passed under ex. B-1 dt. September 30, 1955 Assailing the first part of the decree, the appellant filed this appeal.

( 2 ) THE fac s now proved and accepted by the Court below are that the first respondent is the adopted son of the first defendant- The property belongs to the joint family. Initially the first defendant denied the adoption in a - suit, 0 S No, 105/65. In that suit the plaint schedule property was also one of the items but the appellant-alienee was not impleaded. The trial Court decreed the suit 0 S No. 105/65 under Ex. A-3 dt, December 23, 1967. On appeal in a S No. 19/68, the appellate Court by judgment dated May 16, 1969. under ex A-2 confirmed if. but left open to file a separate suit for partition of the plaint schedule property impleading the appellant-alienee. Thus the suit came to be filed, the defence taken by the appellant is that he is a bonafied purchaser for a valuable considera