Waller, J.

1. The suit is as regards the title to and possession of a house. Plaintiff alleges that she bought the house for Rs. 2,800 in August 1917 and allowed defendant, who is her brothers widow, to occupy part of it. As the latter is now setting up a title in herself, plaintiff sues for a declaration of her title and possession. Defendant replies that she bought the house with her own funds in the name of plaintiff "for fear of her dayadies." Why, if the funds were her own, she should have been afraid of her dayadies is not apparent. The reason is that if her real defence is true the funds out of which the house was acquired were not, strictly speaking, hers at all. What happened was this : defendant, a widow in possession of her husbands estate, sold part of it - a house - in April 1917 for Rs. 2,800. The reversioner at once filed a suit impeaching this and other alienations by the widow. In August, the house now in question was purchased by plaintiff for Rs. 2,800, precisely the same amount as had been received by defendant for the sale in April. In October defendant filed her written statement in the reversioners suit, pleading that the alienations had been for neces