SUMITRA BAI Vs. BARATU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial questions of law involved, formulated and to be answered in the plaintiff's second appeal are as under:

(2.) The suit property was originally held by Udairam. He had only one son Vishambhar. Plaintiff No.1 Keja Bai was his wife who died during the pendency of second appeal. Sumitra Bai plaintiff No.2 is daughter of Vishambhar out of his wedlock with Keja Bai plaintiff No.1. Vishambhar, admittedly, died on 30-5-1955. Mother and daughter plaintiffs No.1 and 2 filed suit for partition impleading Udairam as party defendant in the suit stating inter alia that husband of plaintiff No.1 and father of plaintiff No.2 had half share in the suit property and defendant No.1 is alienating the suit property and is likely to further alienate the suit property, therefore, decree of partition be passed, as the suit was filed on 13-9-1984. On 15-7-1984 and 24-8-1984, Udairam threatened the plaintiffs by denying their title and tried to remove them from his house. The suit property was alienated by Udairam during the pendency of suit.

(3.) Defendant No.1 filed his written statement and pleaded that plaintiff No.1 had lost the status of widow of Vishambhar, as she performed chudi marriage with Budharu Lodhi just after the death of his son Vishambhar and which resulted in her civil death. Udairam defendant No.1 filed his written statement before the trial Court but died during the pendency of suit and could not be examined and sold the suit property to the defendants on 19-9-1984 vide Exs.D-8 to D-12.