JUDGMENT

Coldstream, J. - Gajja, father of the present appellant, sued against the defendants respondents to recover Rs. 25 on account of mangoes taken by them from two mango trees and Rs. 15 on account of damage done by them to the crops on the land on which the mango trees stood, alleging that the land was his and the trees also. The respondents alleged that the land and trees were joint property of the parties. The first issue framed was whether the trees and the land on which they stood were joint. During the course of the suit Gajja died and was replaced by the minor son Bakhsi.

2. The Subordinate Judge found that one trees belonged to Bakhsi and the other to the respondents, and that no damage had been done to the crop other than the mangoes. He gave a decree for Rs. 10 which ho estimated to be the value of the mangoes taken by respondents from the plaintiff's tree. The respondents appealed and the Senior Subordinate Judge came to the conclusion on the evidence that the field on which the tree in respect of which the decree had been passed stood on land belonging to the defendants. He accepted the appeal and dismissed the suit. Bakhsi has appealed urging various grounds on whic