1. The defendants who are the appellants in Appeal Suit No. 173 rely on Exhibit A as sufficient to show that the plaintiffs are not the reversioners of Chinna Venkanna; but, as this document was signed by the 1st plaintiff when a minor, and ' under the influence of the 1st defendant, we are not prepared to hold it sufficient to nullify the evidence set forth by the Subordinate Judge which proves that the plaintiffs are in fact the reversioners.
2. The appellants in A.S. No. 171 are the plaintiffs, and they contend that the Subordinate Judge was wrong in finding that the, lands in Pedagodavalli were not in the possession of Lachmidevi and alienated by her to the Ist defendant.
3. It is not open to the plaintiffs now to raise this contention as their Vakil before the Subordinate Judge did not press their claims to these lands - Raja Bommadevara Venkatanarasimha Naidu v. Raja Bommadevara Bhashyakarlu Naidu (1902) 29 I.A. p. 79. We think that the plaintiffs have failed to prove their contention in regard to these lands.
4. In the result, we dismiss both the appeals with costs.