Raj Kishore Prasad, J.

1. This appeal, by the plaintiff, arising out of a partition suit, is from a judgment of reversal, by which the suit has been dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff was not the daughter of Dipraj Mahton, the admitted owner of the land in suit.

2. Dipraj Mahto died leaving behind his widow Sankeshia and defendant 1, their admitted daughter.

3. According to the plaintiff, Sankeshia had three daughters, namely, Turia, defendant 1, mother of defendants 2 and 3; Khedia, the plaintiff; and Dagni, the deceased mother of defendants 4 and 5.

4. According to the contesting defendants 1 to 3, however, the plaintiff was not the daughter of Sankeshia and defendant 1 was her only daughter. It was admitted however that Turia had also two daughters; and one of them was married to defendant 6.

5. The trial Judge accepted the plaintiffs case and decreed the suit; but, on appeal, his judgment was reversed and the suit was dismissed.

6. The finding of the Court of appeal below that the plaintiff was not the daughter of Sankeshia has been challenged by Mr. Gorakh Nath Singh, appearing for the appellant mainly on two grounds: First, that the admission of defendant 4, a