JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal by the defendant against a decree for the amount of a bond executed by him in favour of the plaintiff on 22nd November 1919. The bond was executed in lieu of a pro-note previously executed by him on 14th December 1916. One of the defences to the suit was that the defendant was a minor on the date of the execution of the pro-note. The Court below has held that this defence fails as the defendant has not established the fact of his being a minor on that date.

2. The appellant contends that the burden of proving that the defendant was not a minor lay on the plaintiff and has cited two oases of this Court of the years 1909 and 1912 respectively in which that view was taken vide Gaya Din v. Musammat Dubari 2 Ind. Cas. 839 : 6 A.L.J. 693, and Kanhaya Lal v. Girdhari Lal 13 Ind. Cas. 956 : 9 A.L.J. 103 The matter appears to us to be concluded against the appellant by the judgment of the Privy Council in Jaganath Preshad, (Raja of Deo) v. Abdullah 45 Ind. Cas. 7700 : 45 C. 909 : 16 A.L.J. 576 : 5 P.L.W. 83 : (1918) M.W.N. 406 : 22 C.W.N. 891 : 8 L.W. 163 : 24 M.L.J. 62 : 28 C.L.J. 192 : 20 Bom. L.R. 851 : M.L.T. 46 : 45 I.A. 97 (P.C.). In that case the plaintiff