Satyanarayana Rao, J.-This appeal raises the question of the binding nature of an alienation on the reversioners to the estate of one Srinivasa Raghavachari. The appellants, defendants 3 to 6, who are the representatives of the alienee, substantially failed, though the findings of the learned Judge are mostly in their favour and hence this appeal.

In this suit the plaintiffs impeached also another alienation in favour of the 7th defendant. ‘They succeeded in the trial Court but there is no appeal by the unsuccessful defendant.

Notwithstanding the extraordinary precautions taken by the alienee and the assurance given at the time of the alienation by the plaintiffs’ father who is a graduate and their maternal grand-uncles who are advocates the alienee could not but face a litigation, unrighteously, as it seems to us, instigated and conducted by the plaintiffs father who was responsible largely for bringing about the alienation for his own benefit This Court, however, not being a Court of morals, is not entitled to decide the case on these considerations and we have to meet out justice according to wellestablished principles of Hindu Law. Srinivasaraghavachari, the last male