Devadoss, J.

1. In this Second Appeal, two points are urged by the appellant. The first is that his guardian (O.S. No. 258 of 1916) was guilty of gross negligence, and therefore, the decree in that suit is not binding on him; the second is that the arrangement under which the appellant was given a house was a family arrangement and the appellant is entitled to the benefit of such arrangement.

2. The plaintiff-appellant brought the suit for a declaration of his right to the plaint shop and to recover possession from the 1st defendant. The 1st defendant brought O.S. No. 258 of 1916, for the possession of the plaint property, against the plaintiff, as 2nd defendant, and his father as 1st defendant, alleging that the father had sold the property to him and that he was entitled to possession of the same. The 2nd defendant was represented by a Court guardian, as no proper guardian was available. The Court guardian, on the day the case was taken up, was absent and the suit was decreed ex parte. The present suit is for the purpose of recovering, from the plaintiff in O.S. No. 258 of 1916, the possession of the property, on the ground that the decree in that suit is not binding on the