1. There is only a short question for decision in this Second Appeal and that concerns whether Ex. P1 settlement deed dated 1-6-1963 executed by defendants 2 and 3 in favour of the plaintiff and 4th defendant has been accepted by the plaintiff. Defendants 2 and 3 are the parents of the 4th defendant who is said to have married the plaintiff. Apparently Ex. P-1 settlement deed refers to the plaintiff as wife of the 4th defendant though 4th defendant disputes the factum of the marriage and the validity of the marriage because, according to the 4th defendant, plaintiff had a husband living on the date of the alleged marriage. Whatever that be, it is clear that the settlement deed Ext. P-1 was executed on the basis that the plaintiff and the 4th defendant were living or proposing to live as husband and wife. It is said that the plaintiff has a child by the 4th defendant. The 4th defendant apparently left the plaintiff later in search of pastures new. Thereafter, defendants 2 and 3 are said to have been persuaded to ignore the settlement already effected and to execute a new settlement deed in favour of the 1st defendant, the daughter, and that is said to be the provocation