JUDGMENT : Knox, J. In this second appeal only the first plea in the memorandum of appeal was argued. The learned Vakil for the appellant contended that before the plaintiff could recover the property to which he was entitled as heir of Inayat-ullah Khan, he must pay the dower debt due to the widow of Inayat-ullah Khan. If it had been found that the widow was lawfully in possession of the estate in lieu of her dower debt, this plea would have had some weight. But the finding on the question is that the possession of Musammat Mariam is not of that nature. 2. In support of his contention, the learned Vakil relied upon the ruling—Dost Muhammad Khan v. Syid Begam, [1898] I.L.R., 20 All., 81. But the dower in that case was of a peculiar nature, consisting in part of a portion of the estate. To sustain the appellant's plea would be to hold that a Muhammedan widow can, by seizing upon her husband's estate, create thereby a lien on it for her dower debt. This, it has been held, she cannot do. Amanat-un-nissa v. Bashirudin nissa, [1895] A.W.N. 7. The appeal is dismissed with costs.