G. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANT No. 1 is the appellant. The dispute relates to properties belonging to one Bidya Padhan who died before 1956 leaving his widow Daimati (defendant No. 2 ). Plaintiff files the suit for a declaration that defendant No. 1 is not the adopted son of Bidya Padhan and that he is the next reversioner of Bidya Padhan on the death of Daimati. Defendant No. 2 is ex parte. Defendant No. 1 contested the suit alleging that Title Suit 110 of 1956 had been filed by defendant No. 2 on the identical ground and that it ended in a compromise decree (Ext. E) dated 21114957 in which the status of defendant No. 1 as the adopted son of Bidya Padhan was upheld. Defendant No. 1 also claimed to be the adopted son of Bidya Padhan and averred that the suit was barred by res judicata and was not maintainable as the plaintiff had no reversionary right subsequent to the passing of the Hindu succession Act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Act.

( 2 ) THE learned trial Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit holding that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiff had no reversionary right, that the suit was barred by res judicata and that in fact defendant No. 1 was the adopte