( 1 ) THE following question has come up before us on a reference by a learned single Judge:

"whether the appeal is barred by Section 11, Civil P. C. , or by the general principles of res judicata as the appeals preferred against the decisions in suits Nos. 77 and 91 of 1951 were rejected and dismissed by this Court and those decisions have become final and binding between the parties. "?

( 2 ) THE facts of the case have been set out in detail in the referring order, and it is unnecessary therefore to repeat them, except in so far as it is relevant for answering the question posed above.

( 3 ) CH. Bhagwan Sahai, the appellant in the aforesaid appeals, brought a suit No. 37 of 1950, against Smt. Daryao Kuer, the first respondent in these appeals, for a declaration that he and his son Ch. Shiv Dan, the second respondent, were the owners of the properties in suit, and for possession in the alternative. According to Ch. Bhagwan Sahai the recorded owner of these properties was his uncle Sri Harnam Singh. Sri Harnam Singh and his adopted son Ram Kishen used to live jointly with Ch. Bhagwan Sahai. Hence after the death of Sri Harnam Singh and his son, Ch. Bhagwan Sahai, and his so