Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. This appeal raises questions of some importance as to the status of the members of a Hindu family, who having been converted to Christianity, are subsequently, reconverted to their old faith.

2. The appellant is the son of the first respondent and he sued for partition of his half share in the family properties, claiming that a mortgage executed by the first respondent in favour of the third respondent and a Court sale in favour of The fifth respondent in execution proceedings instituted against the first respondent are not binding on his share in the properties. The Court below has upheld both the transactions in their entirety and this appeal has been preferred challenging the correctness of that, decision.

3. The facts material for the decision of this appeal may be briefly stated. The appellant was born on the 1st July, 1914. In 1.917, the first respondent and his wife became converts to Christianity and the appellant was also baptised in the same year. In 1930 while the appellant was still a minor, the first respondent executed the mortgage Ex. X which is one of the transactions now impeached in favour of the third respondent for Rs. 7,000 for disc