RAJGOPAL Vs. KISHAN GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by special leave have been filed by the heirs of defendant No. 1-Rajgopal (since deceased) against the judgment rendered by Karnataka High Court whereby judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court dismissing the suit have been set aside and those of the trial Court decreeing the suit restored.

(2.) The plaintiffs/respondents filed a suit for declaration of title in relation to the properties described in schedule appended to the plaint and for recovery of possession thereof. Their case, inter alia, was that one Moti Lal had two wives. From the first wife, he had a son Kishan Lal and from the second, son Goverdhan Das and the properties in question belonged to their joint family. Moti Lal and his brother Uday Ram belonged to Mantri family. In their community, there was a custom of adoption in Dwyamushyayana form, according to which the person adopted would not sever his interest in the estate of natural parents and, at the same time, would acquire interest in the properties of adoptive father upon his adoption, provided there was an agreement between the natural father and the adoptive father to the effect that he will be considered to be son of both of them. As Uday Ram had no male issue, he adopted Goverdhan Das in Dwyamushya-yana form. One Chandra Bai was the wife of Goverdhan Das and Kishan Gopal-plaintiff No. 1 and Srinivas-plaintiff No. 2 were their sons. Sundra Bai-defendant No. 3 was the keep of Kishan Lal from whom he had two sons, namely, Rajgopal-defendant No. 1 and Ramgopal-defendant No. 2 and as Sundra Bai was not legally married with of Kishan Lal, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 were illegitimate children of Kishan Lal from her. Goverdhan Das and his sons were in joint possession of the properties of Uday Ram with him as well as those of Moti Lal with Kishan Lal and his children. Kishan Lal died in the year 1939 and Goverdhan Das in 1945. Thereafter as the sons of Kishan Lal denied rights of the plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 and their father in the properties which belonged to the joint families of Kishan Lal and Goverdhan Das, the same necessitated filing of the present suit.

(3.) In the suit, defendants entered appearance denying claim of the plaintiffs that the adoption was in Dwyamushyayana form and according to them, the same was in ordinary form, as such Goverdhan Das upon his adoption ceased to have any right in the estate of natural father-Moti Lal and upon the death of Kishan Lal, entire property devolved upon his two sons who were legitimate ones as Sundra Bai was legally married wife of Kishan Lal, accordingly plaintiffs had no right to file the present suit.