JUDGMENT

1. The facts giving rise to the litigation, in which this appeal has arisen, as accepted by the Court of appeal below, may be briefly enumerated, in view of the matters in controversy between the parties. One Poornachandra Ganguli had three sons: Kunjabihari, Matilal and Biharilal. Poorna, it would appear, was not at all well off, so, far as his pecuniary circumstances were concerned, and had to spend a part of his life in his father-in-law's house. Kunjabihari, the eldest son, served in the police department of the Government, and had a decent income; out of his own money he acquired property, which is the subject-matter of the present litigation, in the name of his father Poorna, the name of the father having been used for the reason that Kunja's superior officers in the department would have raised objection had it been known that he was acquiring property within the district in which he was serving. Kunjabihari predeceased his father: Kunja died in the year 1912 while his father Poorna's death took place in the year 1919. The father was dealing with the property as his own, in the sense that he was living in the same, which is a house, till the time of his death; there