JUDGMENT

1. The subject-matter of the litigation which has resulted in this appeal is the estate of one Ibrahim Khan, a Pathan Mianwali Tahsil, who is alleged to have died more than 32 years ago, leaving him surviving three widows, Mt, Sahibo, Mt. Jatti and Mt. Nuran, and three daughters, Mt. Basso, Mt. Alimon and Mt. Nuran. It appears that on the death of Ibrahim Khan his property was mutated in four equal sbares in the names of two of his widows, Mt. Sahibo and Mt. Nuran and two daughters, Mt, Nuran and Mt. Alimon. The exact reason why Mt. Jatti, the third widow and Mt. Basso, the third daughter, were excluded from inheritance is not definitely known, but it seems probable that they were not given a share because Mt. Basso had already been married and Mt. Jatti had been turned out by her husband during his life-time on account of her unchastity. In 1891 two deeds of gift were executed, one by aft. Nuran, widow of Ibrahim Khan, in favour of his daughter Mt. Alimon and the Other by Mt. Nuran, the daughter, in favour of her mother Mr. Jatti in respect of some portions of the property to which they had succeeded on Ebrahim's death. These alienations gave rise to two suits by the reversioners of Ibrahim Khan, one of which was instituted on the 16th February, 1892, against Mt. Nuran the widow, and her step-daughter Mt. Alimon, and was registered as Suit No. 38 of 1892. The other suit against Mt. Nuran the daughter, and her mother Mt. Jatti was instituted on the next day the 11th February, and was registered as Suit No. 42 of 1892. In both suits validity of the alienations made by the females wad challenged, and the usual declarations that these alienations will not affect of reversionary rights of the plaintiffs after death or the marriage of the females were prayed for. Both suits were dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that plaintiffs were remote collaterals, and as such not entitled to succeed or to question the alienations in the presence of daughters. The plaintiffs preferred an appeal against the decree of the Trial Court in Suit No. 38 of 1892, but no appeal was preferred in the other suit. The appeal in Suit No. 38 of 1892 was accepted, and it was held by the Divisional Judge that plaintiffs were reversioners of the fifth degree and as such had the locus standi to maintain the suit. This judgment was confirmed on appeal by the Chief Court on 13th July, 1893. The judgment of the Trial Court in Suit No, 42 of 1892 was allowed to become final, and the result of the findings arrived at in that judgment was that as against daughters, other than Mt. Alimon, plaintiffs' right to succeed or to question an alienation remained completely negatived.

2. In 1919 the widow, Mt. Nuran, remarried, and shortly after her remarriage the present suit was instituted by the plaintiffs for possession of the whole of the estate left by Ibrahim Khan on the allegations that by her remarriage the widow's estate enjoyed by Mt. Nuran had come to an end? and that the plaintiffs who were near collaterals of the deceased, were entitled to succeed to the exclusion of the daughters. The suit was at first directed only against Mis. Alimon and Mt. Nuran but subsequently Mt. Basso and Mt. Nuran were also impleaded as defendants. The defendants repudiated the allegations made in the plaint and contended that the question of the competency of the plaintiff to maintain the suit and of their right to succeed in the presence of the daughters had already been decided in a previous suit, and that the judgment in that suit operated as res judicata. It was denied that plaintiffs were collaterals of the fifth degree, and it was pointed out that the property in suit was the self-acquired property of Ibrahim Khan to which the daughters had a superior right to succeed than the plaintiffs who were remote collaterals of more than six degrees. On these pleadings the following issues were framed and set down for trial:

(1) Are plaintiffs entitled to succeed to the proper