JUDGMENT

Kendall, J. - This is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 33,000 and odd principal and Rs. 5,000 and odd interest. It appears that Lachhmi Chand, plaintiff, had two brothers Mohar and Baldeo and they were all separate. The defendant Anrudh Kumar is the son of Mohar and defendant 2, Mt. Kamal Devi, is Anrudh Kumar's wife. On 24th August 1920, Baldeo died as a separated owner. Mohar had predeceased him. Under the Hindu law if Baldeo had died intestate Lachhmi Chand would have succeeded to the entire estate. Anrudh Kumar, who was not the heir-at-law, apart from alleging jointness, set up a will in his favour. In the lifetime of Baldeo some land had been acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act and he died while the proceedings were pending A sum of Rs. 33,000 and odd was awarded as compensation for the property so acquired. On 14th March this amount was paid to Anrudh Kumar who claimed to be the heir of the deceased Baldeo. A suit was instituted by Anrudh Kumar against Lachhmi Chand which was decided on 18th June 1921 by the first Court. It found that the family was separate and that the will which had been set up by Anrudh Kumar was