Anant Singh, J.

1. Those two applications in revision arise out of the same order, dated the 28th January 1960, passed in Title Suit No. 62 of 1959, affecting, however, the petitioners differently. The plaintiff of the title suit is the petitioner in Civil Revision No. 240 and defendant No. 1 is the petitioner in Civil Revision No. 408. They would be referred to hereafter as the plaintiff and defendant No.

1, the other defendants, being opposite party Nos. 2, 6 and 4, having not appeared in the suit.

2. The parties are the members of the same family. The plaintiff is the widow of the brother of defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2 is the sister of defendant No. 1, and defendants 3 and 4 are Bhaginas of defendant No. 1, being sons of defendant No. 2. The plaintiff hag brought the suit for partition.

3. It would appear, however, that there was a family arrangement between the parties. It was duly registered, and is dated 9th July 1951. The plaintiff was also a party to this deed. Under this deed, all the parties partitioned their properties, and took possession of their respective shares as allotted to each of them.

4. The present suit was filed by the plaintiff on the 27th Ju