DHIYAN SINGH Vs. JUGAL KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a litigation between two branches of a family whose common ancestor was one Megh Raj Singh. The family tree is as follows: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_145_AIR(SC)_1952Image1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) THE dispute is about property which, according to the plaintiffs, formed part of Shanker Lal's estate. THE plaintiffs state that the two branches of, the family were separate at all material times; that on Shanker Lal's death in 1884 his daughter Mohan Dei (the defendants grandmother) succeeded to a limited estate. THE reversion opened out on her death in October 1929 and the plaintiffs are entitled as the next reversioners, for Mat. Mohan Dei's son Shri Kishan Das predeceased her. <PG>146</PG>

(3.) WE do not think the words admit of any doubt, particularly as the words "malik mustaqil" have been used: see Ram Gopal v. Nand Lal, 1950 S. C. R. 766 at p. 773 and Bishunath prasad v. Chandika Prasad, 60 Ind. App. 56 at pp. 61 and 62. But it was argued that the award must be viewed as a whole and that certain earlier passages show that this could not have been the intention. The passages relied on are these. First, the finding that the properties claimed by Mst. Moban Dei as her own really belonged to Shanker Lal. He had purchased some and acquired others through mortgages in her name but she was only a benamidar and had no title to them. Second, that some of the properties in dispute were ancestral and the rest self-acquired, though whether with the help of ancestral funds or not the arbitrator was unable to determine. Third, the arbitrator's view of the Hindu law, namely that-