Kinkhede, A J C—This is an appeal by the plaintiffs who have lost their suit in both the Courts below. They claim certain property as reversioners after the death of one Mt. Savitri, the widow of one Raisingh. They claim to be the descendants of Danaji who is said to be the common ancestor. Defendants denied the relationship and stated that Danaji had only two sons Khanaji and Kanaji whereas the plaintiff's contention was that Mukram, through whom they traced their descent was also one of the sons of Danaji.

2. The Court of first instance held that plaintiffs were not the reversioners and had no right to sue, and on that ground dismissed the suit. Plaintiffs preferred an appeal to the First Additional District Judge, Akola, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the dismissal of the suit.

3. They have, therefore, come up in second appeal to this Court.

4. The lower appellate Court rightly remarks that the main strength of the plaintiffs' case lies in the genealogical tree (Ex. P-5) produced by Pundlik (P.W. 2). The said witness has deposed that the pedigree was prepared by his grandfather Bhagwan, as he learnt from his father. Plaintiffs have examined witnesses P.W. 2, P.W. 3