We have theretofore held that a replevin action is primarily one for the possessi on of personal property; yet it is sufficiently flexible to authorize a settlement of all of the equities between the parties arising from, or growing out of, the main controversy. Red River Valley Trust Co. v. Boswell, 173 Okla. 96, 44 P.2d 956; Seran v. Parker, 177 Okla. 219, 58 P.2d 581; Perry v. Jenkins Music Co., 182 Okla. 51, 75 P.2d 1147. We are of the opinion that the contentions made by defendants in their cross-appeal cannot be sustained.

Defendants rely upon other decisions from this court to the effect that it is unnecessary for a case-made to contain a transcript of the stenographic notes of the evidence, since this may be supplied in narrative form, and motion for new trial based solely upon impossibility to make case-made is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. See Jones v. Duncan, 168 Okla. 598, 35 P.2d 451; Godfrey v. F.D. Bearley Lbr. Co., 171 Okla. 425, 43 P.2d 478; Seran v. Parker, 177 Okla. 219, 58 P.2d 581; Smoot v. Mullins, 181 Okla. 505, 75 P.2d 179. Without herein attempting to analyze and distinguish the cases relied upon by the respective parties, it is sufficient to observe that (1) mere inability to secure a transcript does not confer a right of new trial; (2) every case considered by the court on the ground of impossibility to make case-made rests upon the facts of the particular case; (3) a proper decision in such cases rests with the sound discretion of the trial court.

Section 207, O. S. 1931, 12 O.S.A. § 273; Watson v. American Creosote Works, 184 Okla. 13, 84 P.2d 431; Ft. Worth Lead Zinc Co. v. Robinson, 89 Okla. 221, 215 P. 205. It could therefore be properly settled in the replevin action. Perry v. Jenkins Music Co., 182 Okla. 51, 75 P.2d 1147; Mercantile Trust Co. v. Roland, supra: Seran v. Parker, 177 Okla. 219, 58 P.2d 581. 2.