Varadachariar, J.

1. (Appeal No. 171 of 1934). This appeal arises out of a suit for possession. The plaintiff claimed to bo entitled to the suit properties as the widow of one Maniram Misser and according to the plaintiffs case he (Maniram Misser) was the reversionary heir to the estate of the last male owner of the suit properties named Guruprasad. The plaintiffs husband admittedly survived the widows of the last male owner; and if he was the nearest heir to Guruprasad on the date of the widows death, it is not disputed that the plaintiff will be entitled to the property, subject to the other defences raised in the suit. It was contended by the defendants that the plaintiffs husband was not the reversioner. This contention was based upon two grounds: one that Guruprasad had left a will whereby his properties had been bequeathed absolutely to his two widows Rama Bai and Sona Bai; the other ground was that the plaintiff had not proved that her husband was the nearest heir and that there were no nearer heirs in existence.

2. As to the first question, it has been held by this Court in a former stage of this litigation in A.S. No. 132 of 1928 that even on the footing that the wid