( 1 ) THIS is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for partition of a grove and for recovery of Rs. 200/- on account of the price of certain trees which were cut away by the defendants.

( 2 ) THE parties belong to one family. The plaintiffs are the sons of one Bahadur. The defendants to the suit were the descendants of one Nathua, Bahadurs brother. The appellant, one of the defendants, is a minor, grandson of Nathua. Defendants Nos. 2 to 5 were the other descendants of Nathua. Defendant No. 6 was the transferee of the trees. The plaintiffs alleged that they were owners of one-half of the grove as it was the ancestral property of the parties. The defendants, on the other hand, alleged that the plaintiffs had no right in the grove in suit, and that the grove was planted about 40 years ago with the permission of the zamindar by the sons of Nathua in the plot which had come to their share. There were other pleas with which we are not concerned.

( 3 ) THE trial Court held that the plaintiffs had no share in the grove and as such, dismissed the suit. There was an appeal by the plaintiffs. During the hearing of the appeal there was a compromise. It appears that the defen