(1.) Two questions were discussed at the hearing of this appeal. The first was whether the appellant is not entitled under the will of her father to an absolute interest in a moiety of his estate. The second was whether, if under the will the interest taken by her must be limited to that of a Hindu daughter only-as is the contention of the respondents-she is not in the events which have happened, and notwithstanding an ekrarnama entered into on April 17,1909, between herself and her sister, since deceased, entitled for the rest of her life to the remaining moiety of their father's estate, bequeathed in the first instance to her sister and now in the enjoyment of the respondents, the sons of that sister.
(2.) In the Courts in India further questions were raised by the appellant. These were decided against her and were not again ventilated at their Lordships Board. There, the only questions discussed were those just stated-the second of them, in the form presented to the Board, being, as it seems, raised for the first time. But of this later.
(3.) The circumstances of the appellant's father referred to in his will and surrounding him at its date, are not irrelevant upon the question of construction which the appellant raises in the suit.