CHAGLA, C.J.:- Second Appeal No.940 of 1952 which has been referred to a full bench raises the vexed question of the right of an adopted son to divest the property which has already become vested, and the very few facts which are necessary to be stated in order to appreciate the question that has been raised are that Balaji and Ramchandra were two brothers. They were separate and Balaji had predeceased Ramchandra. Ramchandra died on 10-10-1903, leaving his widow Tarabai who died shortly after him on 12-10-1903. Ramchandra had a son by the name of Hanmant who had predeceased both his parents and he had left a widow by the name of Sitabai. Balaji had a son named Dattu who died on 20-1-1916, and Balaji the defendant is the adopted son of Dattu. Sitabai adopted the plaintiff as a son to her husband on 21-1-1945. Ramchandra left certain vatan lands which went to Dattu on the death of Tarabai and on Dattus death Balaji on his adoption went into possession of those lands, and the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of lands belonging to Ramchandra which had gone to Balaji.

2. Now, before we consider the authorities that have been cited at the Bar, perhaps it would be better to a