1. This second appeal has been filed by Amar Singh defendant against the judgement and decree of the Additional District Judge, Karnal, affirming those of the trial Court by which the suit of the plaintiff for possession by pre-emption had been decreed.

2. Briefly, the facts are that Harkesh respondent No.2 sold land measuring 78 Kanals 18 Marlas situated in village Mandi to Amar Singh defendant for a consideration of Rs. 26,000 vide sale deed dt. 26th May, 1966. Tej Ram plaintiff filed a suit for possession by pre-emption on the ground that he was father s brother s son of Harkesh vendor. He took some other pleas which are not relevant for determination of the appeal.

3. The suit was contested by the defendant-vendee who controverted the allegations of the plaintiff and inter alia pleaded that Harkesh was not the adopted son of Smt. Hanso as no adoption took place. It was next averred that he was the son of Phalel son of Baru with whom the plaintiff was not connected. He, therefore, pleaded that the plaintiff had no superior right of pre-emption.

4. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned Subordinate Judge framed seven issues. In appeal, however, the following two iss