1. These appeals arise from suits between a land-lord and his tenants and the material issue in them is as to the rate of rent. There has been a previous adjudication in 1895 between the same parties by a court which, it is conceded, had jurisdiction, which expressly decided the issue as to the rate of rent. The adjudication is pleaded by the landlord as res judicata and he claims that a finding in the present suit on the issue as to the rate of rent should be entered in accordance with the previous adjudication; but it so happens that there was a still earlier adjudication in 1893 on the same issue between the same parties by a competent court, in which a different finding was arrived at. This was not pleaded in the later suits. The tenents plead that there being two conflicting judgments neither of them could be pleaded as res judicata and the court in the present suit was bound to try the issue and come to a conclusion on the evidence which may be placed before it. We think that, on principle, in cases of judgments inter partes the later adjudication should be taken as superseding the earlier. If for example the earlier finding had been pleaded in the suits which resulte