BHARGAVA, J.—This is a second appeal by Bhanwarlal and other heirs of Gaindilal who had originally filed the suit. The suit was filed against Rajbai widow of Motilal, and Rajababu. Rajbai died during the pendency of the suit and after her death other respondents were made parties to the suit.

2. The only contention raised in this appeal is that the courts below have not correctly applied principles of res-judicata and estoppel to the facts of the case. The present suit is for recovery of possession of movable and immovable properties described in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the plaint and for a declaration that the plaintiff, as a reversioner, is entitled to the properties left by Motilal deceased and further that defendant No. 1 i.e., Rajababu is not the adopted son of Motilal.

3. The case of the defendants was that Rajababu was validly adopted by Mst. Rajbai according to the custom prevalent in their community.

4. The contention in this appeal is that the question whether Mst. Rajbai could adopt Rajababu without having any authority from her deceased husband, is barred by res judicata on account of the decree passed in the previous suit No. 82 of

5. In order to sustain the plea of res judi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document