1951 Present : Gratiaen J. and Pulle J.

ABDUL CADER, Appellant, and SITTINISA et al., Respondents

S. C. 77-D. C. Galle, 818

Appeal-Abatement-Application for typewritten copies-Failure to tender fult fees prescribed by Schedule-Revision-Civil Appellate Rules, 1938-Need for-amendment-Rules 2 and 4 (a)-Interpretation Ordinance (Cap. 2), s. 14 (1) (e)-Civil Procedure Code, s. 756 (3),

Proctor and client-Client's deed of gift in favour of Proctor or Proctor's dose relative- Validity thereof-Confidential relationship-Conflict between interest and' duty-Presumption of undue influence-Burden of proof-Requirement of independent adviser.

(i) The appellant, when he made his application for typewritten copies under Rule 2 of the Civil Appellate Rules, 1938, tendered by mistake Rs. 20 instead of Rs. 25 which was the appropriate sum according to the Schedule. As no objection was taken either by the Court Secretary or by the respondents, the sum tendered was accepted and the record was duly forwarded to the Supreme Court.

On objection taken in appeal, under Rule 4 (a) of the Civil Appellate Rules, that the appeal had abated in consequence of the