S.P. Kotwal, JJ.

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for a declaration that certain alienations were not binding upon the plaintiffs (the first and second respondents) who were revisioners entitled to the property of one Moti Patil. the suit was decreed by the trial court and the legal representatives of the alienee are the appellants.

2. In order to explain the relationship of the plaintiffs with the deceased Moti Patil, of whose estate they claim to be reversioners, it is necessary to set forth the following genealogical tree :-

The plaintiffs claimed that Moti Patil who was separate from his brothers died on 28-9-1912, leaving considerable movable and immovable property mentioned in Schedule A attached to the plaint. Moti Patil was twice married and his two wives were Sagni and Rukhi. By the first wife he had a daughter, Punai, and the plaintiffs Vithal and Santosh are the sons of Punai. Plaintiff No. 1 was alleged to have been bom on 16-9-1919. Mst. Punai, their mother, died in 1927. Moti Patils second wife Mst. Rukhi or Rukhmabai was the first defendant in the suit.

3. Moti Palil had three brothers, Zapri, Kesheo and Raghu. Kesheo died and his son Manikrao who was taken