JUDGMENT

Misra and Madeley, JJ. - This judgment will cover First Appeal No. 53 of 1942 and Miscellaneous Appeal No. 77 of 1941.

2. The facts of the case are that Raj Karan Lal was a resident of district Sultanpur. He practiced as a revenue Agent in Fyzabad. He acquired the property in suit, the bulk of which is situated it; Suitaupur district. IN 1906 HE opened a Vedic PailsPala at Pasli;for feeding the AIYA (sic) On the 20th December, 1907, i.e. executed await under which he decided his estate it his own two widows and the widow of his brother for life and the (sic)nder to I am Anand Prasad. the latter is the son of RajKaran Lal's brother's daughter, Pesides this povision there was a legacy of Rs. 25 per me(sic)em for the School at Kashi, but if a school could be opened in his owu village for the same purpose, this legacy was to be transferred to that school. On the 3rd November, 1911, he executed a deed of endowment of some of his prophecies in favour if the Arya Samaj Patbshala at Fyzabad. This deed of endowment is Exh. 2, and it contains among other things the following entry,

Momo: I had executed a will with respect to the rest of my property in favor of Bachcha Ram Anand daughter's son of my younger brother, on the 20th December. 1907, and got it registered on the 21st December, 1907, in the office of the Sub-Registrar Jagdishpur, district Sultanpur, and had made him the last owner on certain conditions, but on account of his misbehavior and bad character, I have cancelled the will as far as he or his relations are concerned.

3. On the 18th January, 1921, Ram Anand Prasad, along with two of the. widows, obtained probate of the will. Their application is Exh. A-3. In this the revocation of the will was not disclosed. On the 30th November, 1931, this lest of the life-estate holders died and the reversion opened. In the absence of any testamentary disposition in favor of Ram Anand Prasad Plaintiffs 2 to 5 were the nearest reversionary. On the 23rd December, 1932, Ram Anand Prasad obtained mutation over the property of Raj Karan Lal. The Plaintiffs filed this suit for possession on the 20th August, 1939, alleging that Plaintiffs 2 to 5 were the nearest reversionary on the death of the widow in 1931 and that Ram Anand Prasad the Defendant has no right or title to the property. Plaintiff No. 1 is the financier. The defense was that the Plaintiffs are not the nearest reversionary, and furthermore that the will executed by Raj Karan Lal and of which probate had been granted by a competent Court, stands in the way of the Plaintiffs. So long as this probate was not revoked by the proper Court, the Civil Court could not ignore it, In reply to this the Plaintiffs alleged that the will of Raj Karan Lal had been revoked on the 3rd November, 1911, by means of the registered deed which is Exh.2. The lower Court dismissed the suit It found that the Plaintiffs were the nearest reversionary and the will. was revoked, but the probate cannot be cancelled by it as it has no jurisdiction, and as long as the probate exists the Plaintiffs cannot succeed. This decision is dated the 4th December, 1940, and on the 18th March, 1941, the first appeal in this Court was admitted. On the 1st December, 1941, the Plaintiffs applied to the probate Court for cancellation of the probate on the ground that the will had been revoked so far as it was still in force, the widows being dead. It was also alleged that the revocation of the will was within the knowledge of Ram Anand Prasad and he had deliberately withheld this information from the probate Court. They further alleged that no citations were issused to the present Plaintiffs and that they knew nothing about the proceedings. Ram Anand Prasad denied the revocation and his knowledge of it. He also denied the necessity of issuing citations to the Plaintiffs. The lower Court dismissed this application, finding that the revocation of the will is not proved. It also held that no fraud was proved.

4. The main questi