1. This suit was brought in order to enforce the plaintiff's right to be on the register of voters for the election of Commissioners of Chittagong to be held in March 1925. All these proceedings have become merely academic in the events that have happened, because there was a fresh election for the Commissioners of Chittagong in 1928, and for the purposes of and prior to that election the plaintiff's name was inserted in the register of voters. The learned Additional District Judge, from whose decree the present appeal is brought, found as a fact that the plaintiff-respondent had not complied with the rules which would entitle his name, if otherwise qualified, to be inserted in the register of voters lb is conceded by the respondent that that is a finding of fact which, in second appeal, we are not at liberty to reconsider. The learned Additional District Judge, having arrived at the finding of fact that the plaintiff had failed to fulfil the conditions precedent to having his name registered ought, to have dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The plaintiff claimed a declaration that he was qualified to have his name inserted as a voter in the register; but her only sought that declaration for the purpose of obtaining an order upon the; Chairman of the Municipality to insert; his name in the register of voters; as he had not complied with the conditions which must needs be fulfilled in order; that he should be entitled, if otherwise; qualified, to have his name inserted, he would be not entitled to a declaration that he had the status of a voter, which was merely ancillary to the main relief which he sought, namely, that his name should be in the register.
2. In these circumstances we are not disposed to consider the question as to whether the plaintiff was qualified to be a voter at the election of the Commissioners of Chittagong; and we express no opinion upon the question one way or the other. That is a matter which may arise for consideration if and when his qualification is challenged hereafter. It is sufficient for the disposal of this suit to hold that whether he was qualified to be a voter or not he was not entitled in the events that happened to have his name inserted in the register of voters for the election of 1925.
3. The result is that the appeal is allowed and the plaintiff's suit dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.