Horace Owen Compton Beasley, Kt., C.J.

1. In this Letters Patent Appeal the only point arising for consideration is upon a construction of Ex. A. This was a security bond executed by the 1st defendant in the suit who was a subscriber in the chit fund in favour of the stake-holder giving security for the amount of the instalments engaging to pay the sums as and when they fell due regularly. This chit was to run throughout sixteen half-yearly instalments. The 1st defendant was apparently the holder of half a chit and his subscription, half-yearly, was Rs. 125. He bought the chit at the very first auction and became entitled to Rs. 2,000. From this amount of Rs. 2,000 there was deducted Rs. 125, being the first subscription payable by him. That left a total amount of Rs. 1,875. In accordance with the rules of the chit, having bought the chit and received payment of the amount due to him the 1st defendant had to execute a security bond in favour of the stake-holder and as the learned Judge in second appeal says the bond he executed was one of the usual documents. It appears to us to be the usual form of document executed with regard to chit funds. That is Ex. A. There is a provi