Harun-UL-Rashid, J .

1. Substantial questions of law formulated in the second appeal at the time of admission are as follows:

i) Whether on the facts pleaded and the circumstances proved in the case taken along with the admissions of the plaintiff himself, the transaction evidenced by Ext.A2 could at all be found to be a sham transaction and whether the decision of the lower court is sustainable?

ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled in law to raise any claim of title and possession when the major portion of the properties (plaint B schedule being only a lesser part of it) were acquired by the State from the possession of the defendant, comspensation in respect of the the acquired portion was paid to the defendant without any protest from the plaintiff?

iii) It is brought out in evidedence that the transaction evidenced by Ext.A2 forms part and parcel of mutual transfers between the plaintiff, his father, Easwaran Namboodiri, the defendant and their brothers, Govindan Namboodiri and Kesavan Namboodiri, all of which has taken place on 13.2.1981. Under such circumstances whether the plaintiff is at all entitled to contend that one of such mutual transfers alone evidenced by Ext.A