Phillips, J.

1. The plaintiff in this case, one Somi Naidu and the father of the defendants were brothers who effected a partition in 1898. This case relates to the share which fell to Somi Naidu. He died in 1906, leaving a widow. In 1907 the plaintiff and the defendants entered into an arrangement under which they partitioned Somi Naidus share and agreed that the defendant should pay a certain sum to the widow, who lived till 1914. She appears to have taken no objection to this arrangement. The plaintiff now seeks to recover the property allotted to the defendants under this agreement of 1907, and it is contended for the appellants that he is barred from doing so by reason of this agreement and reliance is placed on a decision of the Privy Council in Kanhai Lal v. Brij Lal [l918] 40 All. 487. In that case one Kanhai Lal who subsequently became the reversioner of a widow Bam Deiclaimed the whole of the property which fell to the widow as reversioner. Before the reversion fell in, there was litigation between the parties, Kanhai Lal claiming to be the adopted son of one widow and setting up that her husband was divided from his brothers. These disputes were compromised in 189