(1.) The present proceeding arise out of First Appeal No. 79 of 1922 of this Court from the decree in which an appeal was filed before their Lordships of the Privy Council as Privy Council Appeal No. 12 of 1925. Their Lordships of the Privy Council decided the appeal and reversed the judgment of this Court but left one point to be determined by this Court and that point is, whether in the circumstances of the case, the plaintiffs cannot recover possession of the property decreed to them except on payment of a sum of Rs. 7,200 and interest-thereon or any other sum?
(2.) The judgment has been reported in the local law journal, Munni Bibi V/s. Triloki Nath , and is of course also on the record. The facts are given there and we shall not state them in detail again.
(3.) Two questions have been argued before us. The first is whether the claim on behalf of the descendants of Gokul Nath comes within the purview of Section 69, Contract Act; and secondly, if it does, whether the defendants can insist on being paid as a condition precedent to the plaintiffs getting possession.