Sadasiva Aiyar, J.

1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The material facts found are: The 1st defendants husband Chinna Sambayya had two undivided brothers, namely P. Sambayya and G. Sambayya. P. Sambayya was the eldest, G. Sambayya was the second brother, and the 1st defendants husband C. Sambayya was the yougest. P. Sambayya died issueless about the year 1877. G. Sambayya who was born blind about 1847 had, however, been invested with the sacred thread (the parties being Brahmins by birth) as if he had no such disability and lived in commensality with his younger brother C. Sambayya in undivided family communion after the death of the eldest brother P. Sambayya. G. Sambayya died in December 1911 when he was about 65 years old. His younger brother C. Sambayya, the 1st defendants husband had predeceased him in November 1906 leaving his widow the 1st defendant as his heir. Soon after the 1st defendants husbands death on the 19th January 1907, the blind Brahman G. Sambayya, executed the will Exhibit VII as follows: " I am now 60 years old. I am born blind. Your husband is my undivided brother. I am unmarried. My younger brother has no male issue. He left only two daughters. I execute this will in a sound and disposing state of mind so as to make my entire property devolve on you after my death with powers of alienation by gift and sale. For the continuation of the line, you are authorised to adopt any boy whom you please whenever you desire. If you do not desire to adopt, you should have the right of alienation by gift and sale, as you please, in respect of the entire property mentioned herein. This will is to take effect after my death." At the foot of the will, the particulars of the property bequeathed are given and they are said to be in possession and enjoyment of the testator. One of the houses in Panduvva village is stated to have been purchased by the blind testator in November 1900 and to have remained in his possession.

2. The testator was an active and intelligent man taking part in all family transactions and contributing to the maintenance and improvement of the family. As a matter of fact he seems to have been entirely managing the family affairs during his life-time and the 1st defendants husband was a mere figurehead. As a Vaidic Brahmin he would be officiating at ceremonies and going about for Sambhavanas and Dhakshinas on marriage and other occasions not only when they took place in his own village but also in adjoining villages. His blindness far from being a disqualification, was a recommendation to his being paid double the usual Dhaleshinas paid to other Brahmins. He appears to have been well versed in the Brahmanical puranic and other religious literature and appears to have been, in the habit of expounding them to the villagers. He took part in the cultivation of the lands and he sold lands, purchased lands, incurred debts by mortgaging lands, executed simple debt bonds and discharged them all on behalf of the family. (See documents beginning in 1881, Exhibit II and ending with Exhibit XIX, dated 1910). The 1st defendant has been in possession of the properties after the death of her brother-in-law (G. Sambayya) in 1911.

3. The plaintiff is the undivided agnate cousin of G. Sambayya and of C. Sambayya. He treated the blind man as the surviving full owner of the family properties after the death of the 1st defendants husband. The plaintiff even got a decree against the blind man in 1910, the liability of the blind man being based on his ownership of his family lands.

4. The present suit was brought in July 1915 on the following averments:

(a) The blind Sambayya had, according to Hindu Law, no ownership right in the plaint properties. His younger brother who died in November 1906 was sole owner at his death. His widow the 1st defendant in 1906 inherited the properties with a widows interest.

(b) The will of blind Sambayya of January 1907 in respect of the properties, which did not, as above shown, belong to