Wallis, J.

1. I agree with the conclusion of the District Judge, that there was a bona fide compromise of a doubtful claim entered into during the plaintiffs minority by their father as manager of the joint family and that as such it is binding on the plaintiffs. His judgment has been attacked on the ground that it is inconsistent with his finding that there was no real dispute between the parties as to Rangammas claim to a one-third share of the village in question. In Exhibit IV, the document it is sought to set aside, which purports to be a settlement of all matters arising with respect to the village, this dispute is put in the forefront, although it is suggested that there were other differences as well, and if there were no bona fide dispute in this matter, it would certainly go far to affect the binding character of the settlement. I am, however, satisfied on an examination of the evidence that a bona fide dispute existed. This was a village held by the plaintiffs family on mokhasa tenure from the zemindar of Kangundi in the North Arcot District and was first granted in 1807 when the sister of the then zemindar married the plaintiffs ancestor. The claims of the zemind