Abdur Rahim, J.

1. The appellant, who is a minor, instituted the suit by her next friend, her father, to recover certain properties from the respondent-defendant, her husband. Her title is based on a deed of gift executed by Krishna Kampti, the adoptive father of the respondent, who died on the 17th April 1909. The defence on the merits, broadly speaking, was of two-fold character. Firstly, that the alleged deed of gift was executed under the undue influence of the appellants father who procured it by means of mis-representation and fraud and secondly, that the contemplated gift was never completed according to law and was in fact revoked by Krishna Kampti before it could be completed.

2. Krishna Kampti, who was possessed of considerable properties, moveable and immoveable, was an inhabitant of a village called Karingan in the South Kanara District. He adopted the defendant when he was only 9 months old and until shortly before the date of the transaction in question, the defendant and his first wife lived in the same house with Krishna Kampti and his wife on the best of terms. The defendant, however, had no child though he was nearly 39 years old and his wife about 33. Krish