Page 6 true her marriage prospects are diminished, and it is even more true that if a suitor does in due course emerge, that he or his parents, would insist, or try to, on paying less 'bohali' than the normal one of 20 heads. Nevertheless, the girl and her child (or children) are at least assured, for the duration of her parents life time perhaps beyond, of a great measure of sympathy and support. The Plaintiff in the case before me has none of these advantages. I think I have to, in the assessment of damages for seduction, bear this in mind. It would be inequitable not to. Under this head I think I am justified in awarding her the full equivalent in money terms of what her parents, if she had any, would have benefited (that is 20 heads at M200 viz M4000.' The above brief summary forms the basis upon which the order against which the appeal is directed, was made. Defendant appeared before us in person. Regrettably, his argument was of little assistance to us. In fact much of the time was taken up with attempts on his part to give evidence or to make completely unsupported allegations of prejudice against the presiding judge and officials of the court. It accordingly is necessary for us to examine the evidence and the findings of the Chief Justice with reference to the grounds of appeal set out in the notice. A reconsideration of the evidence convinces me that no reasonable grounds exist why we should conclude differently from the court a quo on the critical issue of the credibility of the two. principal actors. There is certainly considerable ground for finding that Defendant was a lying witness and that he deliberately fabricated evidence in order to impugn the character of the Plaintiff. The deliberate fabrication of this evidence must, as indeed it did, have weighed heavily against him in determining whether or not the Plaintiff had discharged the onus which rested upon her. 7/....