The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of genuineness of a genealogical tree under Section 32(6) and Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act.

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 and P.W. 5 to-prove the several links in the pedigree, even the defendants' witnesses D.W. 2, D.W. 3 and D.W. 5 have proved the family tree in certain degrees. Thus in the words of the Additional District Judge himself, the evidence on the record proves the tree for about four generations

but no further. He, ultimately, concluded that the evidence failed to establish the immediate relationship of the plaintiffs with the deceased Raisingh. The reasoning on which this conclusion is based is stated in these words in the judgment: It is difficult to believe in the truth of the genealogy produced because it tallies with the relations of the existing persons merely without proof of other material circumstances which, shall establish its genuineness.

5. It is also remarked that none of the witnessess prove the entire pedigree as given in this tree but only parts of them are proved.

6. It will thus be seen that the learned. Additional District Judge treats the document as partly proved, but at the same time, for want of evidence to prove the remote links in the pedigree, entertains, suspicion as regards its genuineness. He has, however, not come to a definite finding that the document is not genuine.

7. It thus appears that in the opinion of the Additional District Judge some more proof was necessary to enable him to come to the conclusion that the entire pedigree was proved as that alone would have established the plaintiffs' relationship with the deceased Raisingh. In this, state of evidence and findings the plaintiffs-appellants urge that if the statement of relationship contained in the genealogical tree is proved to be true in material parts, and it is also proved that it had come into the hands of the witness who produced it from his ancestors who were dead and gone at the time of the present controversy, the Court of appeal below was bound to presume that the rest of the statement of relationship, contained therein was also correct in view of the provisions of Section 32(6), Indian Evidence Act. Except the testimony of plaintiff as P.W. 1 and of P.W. 2 there is no independent evidence on record to prove the handwriting of the genealogical tree. The statement of P.W. 2 that his father used to say that the genealogical tree was prepared by Bhagwan, his father, uncorroborated though it is, makes the document more than 30 years old as Bhagwan is said to have died more than 32 years ago. In my opinion the lower appellate Court before proceeding to consider the weight to be attached to Ex. P-5 ought to have come to a definite finding whether that document is genuine or not in all its particulars. In judging its evidentiary value before judging its genuineness it has really put the cart before the horse. In view of the fact that the relationship as described the