1. The plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are sisters of defendant Nos. 3 to 5. By an instrument of partition entered into between defendants Nos. 3 to 5 it was stipulated that certain land was to be enjoyed by the mother of the parties for her life and to be taken by her daughters, that is the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 and 2, after her death. The mother is now dead. This suit by the plaintiff is to recover one third of that property, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 being entitled to the remaining two thirds.

2. Defendants Nos. 3 to 5, the brothers, contend that the plaintiff, not being a party to the partition instrument, has no cause of action for the recovery of the property. They plead that by a subsequent arrangement soon after the partition they cancelled the allotment to the mother and sisters. It was suggested during the course of the argument here that the partition deed never became operative but we do not read the written statement as raising this question. The issue was whether the arrangement was subsequently cancelled. The lower appellate court has given the plaintiff a decree and defendants Nos. 3 to 5 are the appellants in this court.

3. We are of opinion tha