Ramaswami, J.

1. It is advisable at the outset to set out the material facts which have led to the prosecution of this appeal. Janki Pandey and Foujdar Mahton had obtained a preliminary mortgage decree against which the judgment-debtor preferred appeal to the High Court. While the appeal was pending, Janki Pandey died and in his place plaintiff and defendant 1 were substituted. After the appeal was dismissed, final decree was prepared in favour of plaintiff and defendant 1. The plaintiff brought this present suit for a declaration that he was the daughters son of deceased Janki and being his sole heir was entitled to the entire money due on the mortgage decree. The plaintiff also asked for a temporary injunction restraining defendant 1 from withdrawing his share of the amount due on the mortgage decree. The main ground of defence was that plaintiff was not the grandson of Janki, that the suit was in any ease barred by res judicata. The learned Munsif held that plaintiff was the sole heir of the deceased Janki, but he dismissed the suit on the ground that the rule of res judicata applied. In appeal the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the judgment of the Munsif holding tha