Lord Blanesburgh. - The following pedigree taken from the pleadings will serve to explain the position of the parties in this case. It is probably well to explain that it is printed in the reverse way from that usually obtaining in England. That is to say, the elder branch is to the right and the younger to the left The subject of contest ranges round certain villages situated in Fattehpur. They were in the possession of Rao Ram Bakhsh Singh, who was executed after the Mutiny, and his property forfeited. The villages were given back to his senior widow, Lallu Kunwar. After her death they were possessed by his junior widow, Chhatarpal Kunwar, till her death in 1893. On her death they passed to and were enjoyed by Udit Narain Singh, who possessed them till his death in 1910. After his death his widow, Sarsuti Kunwar, had possession till her death in 1912. On her death possession was obtained by the only surviving son of Udit Narain Singh, wit, the first defendant, Chandar Shekhar Bakhsh Singh, and by the widow of the other son deceased, as in right of main tenance, the family being, as alleged, joint with Defendant No. 2. Mutation of names was obtained accordingly. The suit was raised some years after wards by the plaintiff (now dead), who was the only daughter of Udit Narain Singh. She alleged that she was the only heir of her father, Udit Narain Singh, her one brother having died be fore his father and her other brother, the Defendant No. 1, having no right in respect that he had been adopted by his uncle, Girja Bakhsh Singh, and was con sequently for succession purposes no to longer the son of his natural father. To this Chandar Shekhar Baksh Singh, who will hereinafter be spoken of as the only defendant, the only right of property being in him, replied first by denying the fact of his adoption by his uncle, and second by saying that, even assuming the adoption proved, he was entitled to succeed as the nephew of his natural father, there being a custom in the family to exclude females from suc cession. Proof was led at great length on both sides. On appeal, the learned Judges reversed his judgment. They found the adoption proved. It then became necessary to enquire as to the custom. Proof was led at great length on both sides. On appeal, the learned Judges reversed his judgment. They found the adoption proved. It then became necessary to enquire as to the custom. This they held not proved, and consequently they gave a decree in favour of the plaintiff. On appeal to the King in Council their Lordships first heard parties as to the adoption. They came to the conclusion that they would not disturb the finding of the Court of appeal and intimated this to the parties. They agreed with the learned Judges of the Court of appeal that the proof rested on the reiterated declarations by Chandar Shekhar Bakhsh Singh himself, extending over a number of years, that he was the adopted son of Girja Bakhsh Singh. The parties were subsequently heard at great length on the question of custom. Under the Mitakshara Law the plaintiff would succeed. It is, therefore, for the defendants who alleged a custom to prove it, and it has been laid down again and again that the custom must be ancient and the proof conclusive. Their Lordships feel that the general law would be weakened if this rule were not always strictly adhered to even in a case like the present, where the custom alleged is neither unique nor unknown. Their Lordships have accordingly ap proached the consideration of the case in this attitude of mind, and having read the voluminous evidence adduced, and duly weighed the careful and elaborate arguments of counsel on both sides, they have reached, not without hesitation and, in the special circumstances of this case, not without some reluctance, the conclusion that they would not be justi fied in disturbing the finding of the Court below. The judgment is an exceedingly elaborate and careful one. The ques tion, after all, is one of fact. The result affects this family alone. The decision of the learned Judges being what it is, no general question of law is involved. In these circumstances, their Lord ships think that no useful purpose would be served by any re-statement of the position in their own words. The conclusion reached in the Court below must remain undisturbed and their Lordships will, therefore, humbly advise His Majesty to dismiss the appeal with costs. Appeal dismissed.