JUDGMENT :- This is a plaintiff's appeal against the confirming decision of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack.

2. The plaintiff sued for her own title and for a declaration that the defendants 1 to 4 had not acquired any title by virtue of their sale deeds. She also wanted affirmation of her possession and permanent injunction restraining the defen-dants from interfering with her right and possession.

3. The plaintiff became an orphan and the defendant no.5 said to be her maternal uncle as de facto guardian transferred her entire property in favour of the defendant no.1 on 7th June 1948 (Ext.C). The defendant no.1 sold a part of that property under two separate registered sale deeds in favour of the defendants 3 and 4 on 9th February, 1951 (Ext.B) and 21st January, 1959 (Ext.A) respectively. A short genealogy would show the relationship of the plaintiff and the defendant no. 1.

4. The plaintiff alleged that the alienation by the de facto guardian was not for necessity nor for consideration and was not binding upon her. Accordingly, she wanted the alienations to be set aside.

5. The defendants 1,3,4 and 5 contested; the defendants 1 and 5 filed one joint written statement,