( 1 ) THIS second appeal arises an interesting point of law.

( 2 ) IT appears that one Srimati Kaniz Begam started living with one Maheshi Lal sometime about the year 1892. Maheshi Lai was a Hindu while Kaniz Begam was a Muslim. There were some children born of Kaniz Begam and begotten by Maheshilal and they are plaintiffs 1 and 2 and defendants 1 to 5. Kaniz Begam continued to live with Maheshi Lal till his death in about 1941 and she herself died in 1946. She left some movable property in the shape of a share in a sugar mill and, according to the plaintiffs, also some jewellery etc. The share and jewellery were taken over by defendants 1 to 4 and the suit which has given rise to this appeal was then brought for the recovery of this property on the allegations that Srimati kaniz Begam had been living with Maheshi Lal as his wife, that she had also undergone a regular ceremony of conversion in the year 1927 and that she died as a Hindu woman in 1946. The property in dispute was her stridhan property and the plaintiffs were entitled to succeed to that property in preference to defendants 1 to 4. A succession certificate had been obtained by defendants 1 to 4 in res