Tbe evidence adduced on the plaintiff’s examination in chief, and the testimony of his other witnesses, was sufficient to carry the case to the jury.on the issue of plaintiff’s alleged total and permanent disability within the meaning of the policy in suit. Mitchell v. Assurance Society, 205 N. C., 721; Misskelley v. Ins. Co., 205 N. C., 496, 171 S. E., 862; Green v. Casualty Co., 203 N. C., 767, 167 S. E., 38; Bulluck v. Ins. Co., 200 N. C., 642, 158 S. E., 185. Compare Thigpen v. Ins. Co., 204 N. C., 551, 168 S. E., 837; Buckner v. Ins. Co., 172 N. C., 762.

The defendant, realizing the force and effect of Dr. Wyatt’s testimony, also appeals and in this way seeks to test the competency of his evidence, should the judgment of nonsuit be reversed, citing as authority for the position Hunt v. R. R., 203 N. C., 106, 164 S. E., 626. But a defendant, who asks for no affirmative relief, is not the “party aggrieved” by a judgment of nonsuit within the meaning of C. S., 632. McCullock v. R. R., 146 N. C., 316, 59 S. E., 882. Nor does Hunt’s case decide otherwise.

Plaintiff’s appeal, reversed.

Defendant’s appeal, dismissed.