Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. Several questions of law have been argued by Mr. Rangaswami Ayyangar, but I do not think that I need on that account reserve judgment. The case now comes up before me after report by the Commissioner, who has been appointed to enquire into certain matters, but, I understand, that for the purpose of this judgment, it is unnecessary either to look into that report or to go through the pleadings. The facts, as stated from the Bar, may be briefly summarized. The plaintiff lent moneys to a firm known as Govindaswami & Co. It originally consisted of two divided brothers, Govindaswami and Chengayya. The former had sons, who do not matter for the present, excepting one of them, Lingayya by name. During the continuance of the firm, Chengayya died in 1916; his widow Chinna, Kannammal took her husbands place in the partnership and the business was continued in the same manner as before. She died on 20th April 1920, having ten days before her death adopted Lingayya as her son. The business of the firm was continued, it having been taken for granted that Lingayya represented Chengayyas estate in the partnership.

2. During the lifetime of Chengayya, the partnership