Wallis, J.

1. This is an action for damages. The plaintiff was appointed guardian of the person, and the defendant guardian of the property, of the minor. Subsequently on the plaintiffs application the defendant was removed from the guardianship of the property. He then preferred an appeal to this Court and applied for stay of execution and filed an affidavit in support of that application. In answer to that affidavit, the plaintiff died a counter-affidavit and in answer to the counter-affidavit the defendant filed a reply affidavit in which he made statements reflecting on the character of the plaintiff which, unless privileged, were undoubtedly defamatory, and which, for the purpose of this judgment, must be taken to have been made both falsely and maliciously. Even so, I am of opinion that no civil action will lie. It is laid down by the Privy Council in Ganesh Dutt Singh v. Mugneeram Chowdry (1872) 11 B.L.R. 321 that "witnesses cannot be sued in a civil court for damages, in respect of evidence given by them upon oath in a judicial proceedig." Now there is no difference in this respect, in my opinion, between evidence given in the box and the evidence on affidavit. This