(1.) The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered in this defendants' second appeal is as under: -
(2.) The suit land was originally held by Charan Lodhi, who died in the year 1946 and his widow Ganeshiya Bai become the limited owner of the suit land. She executed sale deed dtd. 24/8/50 in favour of Lekharam. Ganeshiya Bai had a daughter namely Matibai, who filed Civil Suit No.78-A/1952 (Shrimati Matibai v. Lekharam and one another) for declaring the sale deed dtd. 24/8/50 as not binding on her as it was not alienated for legal necessity. That suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 21/10/1953. Questioning that judgment and decree, Matibai filed first appeal being Civil Appeal No.5-A/1955 (Shrimati Matibai v. Lekharam and another). The first appellate Court by its judgment and decree dtd. 28/7/1955 (Ex.P/1) decreed the suit holding that sale by limited owner Ganeshiya Bai in favour of Lekharam was not for legal necessity and held that sale deed dtd. 24/8/50 executed by Ganeshiya Bai in favour of Lekharam shall not be binding on Matibai after death of Ganeshiya Bai. Thereafter, Ganeshiya Bai died on 30/3/91 and Matibai also died on 14/7/91. Matibai's son Derharam filed a suit for declaration of title and possession stating inter-alia that sale deed dtd. 24/8/50 executed by Ganeshiya Bai in favour of Lekharam has already been declared void in the earlier suit and therefore, the plaintiff being grandson of Charan Lodhi and son of Matibai has succeeded the suit property after death of her mother in his reversionary right and therefore, decree for declaration of title and possession be granted in his favour.
(3.) The defendants, who are legal representatives of purchaser Lekharam, resisted the suit on different grounds stating inter-alia that their possession has become adverse over the suit land and since Ganeshiya Bai did not prefer any suit questioning the sale deed dtd. 24/8/50, therefore, sale has become final and the suit is barred by limitation.