(1). HEARD the learned advocates for the respective parties. The facts of the case very briefly are as follows: by a registered deed of settlement dated 25th January, 1968 one sushil Chandra Kayal conferred life interest in respect of the suit property in favour of his second wife Nalinibala Kayal and it appears that it was stipulated in the said deed of settlement that so long as nalinibala Kayal will be alive, she will possess, enjoy and maintain the suit property by mutating her name and paying taxes and that from the income of the said property the said Nalinibala Kayal (second wife of sushil Chandra Kayal) will maintain herself and also one Kalyani kumar, as indicated in the said deed. It appears that it was further stipulated in the said deed of settlement that the said Nalinibala Kayal will never be able to sell the suit property to any person, but, Nalinibala koyal will be able to let out the said property and will also hold festival every year on the birth day of Sushil Chandras preceptor Sri Sri sitaram Onkarnath as stipulated in the said deed. It was further stipulated in the said deed that after the demise of Nalinibala Kayal and Sushil Chandra Kayal, the nephew of Sushil Chandra Kayal, namely, Shyam Sundar Kayal will maintain and look after the said property and from the income of the said property the said Shyam sundar Kayal will look after the said Kalyani Kumar and her children and will also hold festival every year on the birth day of the said preceptor of Sushil Chandra Kayal. It appears that it was further stipulated in the said deed that the said, Shyam Sundar Kayal shall be under an obligation, after meeting the necessary expenses as stipulated in the said deed, to develop the said property for increasing its income and whatever fund remains after meeting such obligations the said fund can be utilised by the said Shyam Sundar Kayal for his personal purpose, and it was further stipulated in the said deed that the said Shyam sundar Kayal during his lifetime and before his death may appoint any person for looking after the said property. That Sushil Chandra Kayal and Nalinibala Kayal further executed a registered deed of gift dated 25th September, 1974 in respect of some property.

(2). THAT after the death of Sushil Chandra Kayal, the said Kalyani kumar brought a suit being Title Suit No. 95 of 1979 against the said nalinibala Kayal and Shyam Sundar Kayal for partition and declaration. It appears that in the said suit Shyam Sundar Kayal was appointed as a receiver but the said suit was ultimately dismissed and the said kalyani Kumar preferred an appeal being F.A. No. 318 of 1987 in this honble Court. The said Kalyani Kumar and Nalinibala Kayal along with the proforma defendants/respondent Nos. 3 to 5 entered into a compromise and the said appeal was disposed of on the basis of such compromise. It appears from the order passed by the Honble Court on the basis of the said compromise that neither the said Kalyani Kumar nor the said Nalinibala Kayal and the proforma respondent Nos. 3 to 5 claimed any interest in respect of the subject matter of the deed of gift dated 25th September, 1974 which was made in favour of Shyam sundar Kayal, as aforesaid, and it was directed that the suit will be dismissed as regards the said property which is the subject matter of the said deed of gift. It was further recorded in the said order of the Honble Court that the terms of compromise are lawful and are made for the benefit of both the appellant (in the said appeal) as well as the respondent No. l (in the said appeal), that is, Nalinibala Kayal. It was further recorded in the said order that whatever compromise has been recorded in between the appellant (Kalyani Kumar) ano the respondent no. 1 (Nalinibala Kayal) and respondent Nos. 3 to 5 has been so. done without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondent No. 2 (Shyam Sundar Kayal) and that the Honble Court did not feel it duty bound to decide upon th