Judgement

RAO, J. :- This second appeal is filed by the plaintiffs against the confirming judgment of the District Judge of Cuttack dismissing the suit.

2. The plaintiffs case is that the disputed properties originally belonged to one Padmalay Panda who died leaving the mother of plaintiff 1 and plaintiff 2 as daughter and one Sadhu husband of defendant 4 as the only son; that Sadhu died in 1940 leaving a son Gopi and his widow defendant 4 but a year later, that is, in 1941 Gopi also died; that defendant 4 executed two sale deeds in favour of defendants 1 to 3 without any legal necessity or consideration; and that the suit is therefore filed for a declaration that the sale deeds are invalid and not binding on them.

3. The contention of defendants 1 to 3 is that mother of plaintiff 1 was not a daughter of Padmalay but was a daughter of a sister of Padmalav; that Padmalav had two brothers Kritibas and Lakshmidhar; that defendant 1 is the son of Kritibas and defendants 2 and 3 are the son and grandson respectively of Lakshmidhar; that as Gopi was the last male-holder, the plaintiffs are strangers and not entitled to sue; that they (defendants 1 to 3) are the reversioners entitled to succ