1. The failure to notice the obviously preposterous nature of many if not most of the claims made in the civil Courts is perhaps the cause and perhaps the effect of the success of many of them, or perhaps both. In 1923 the father of the two plaintiffs sold their two-thirds share in joint family property, along with his own one-third share, to the defendant Khushal Teli for Rs. 40,000. It was not pretended in the plaint that there was anything wrong with the transaction beyond certain technical flaws in the conveyance, and the plaintiffs' claim, which has partly succeeded, was that, because of those flaws only, the whole of the property, including the share belonging to their father whom they joined as defendant 2, should be returned to them and they should be allowed to keep the Rs. 40,000 Khushal paid them for it. If it were not of almost daily occurrence that similar and even more preposterous claims are allowed to succeed, as this has been in part, it would be amazing that a Court should even consider this claim seriously.

2. It has been found in the lower Court that plaintiff 1, Babhan Rao Maratha, was born on 18th January 1907 and, therefore, his 18th birthday was on 18