BANDHIYA DEVI Vs. REETA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The suit property was originally held by two brothers namely Tapeshwar Sao and Mahadeo Sao. Tapeshwar Sao who was elder brother of Mahadeo Sao died in the year 1945-46 leaving her widow Domni Devi, defendant No.2 herein and daughter Shanti Devi. It is the case of the plaintiff that since Tapeshwar Sao died in the year 1945-46 and before coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 on 17th June, 1956, therefore, Domni has limited interest in the suit property and after 5 years of death of Tapeshwar Sao, the plaintiff remarried with Domni Devi and started leaving as husband and wife and they were blessed with four daughters. Since after death of Tapeshwar Sao, Domni Devi remarried with the plaintiff, as such, the plaintiff has succeeded the entire property including the property of Tapeshwar Sao and has become title-holder of entire land and sale made by Domni, wife of Tapeshwar Sao, on 8.12.98 in favour of her daughter defendant No.1-Reeta Devi is null & void and inoperative and defendant No.1 be restrained from interfering with his peaceful possession with respect to the property shown in Schedule 'B' annexed with the plaint.

(3.) Defendants No.1 and 2 filed their joint written statement opposing the plaint allegations and denied the fact of remarriage and further pleaded that despite opposition by Domini Devi and during lifetime of the plaintiff's first wife, the plaintiff made physical relationship with her (defendant No.2) and thereafter remarried with Domni Devi after five years of death of Tapeshwar Sao in the year 1951-52, as such, the plaintiff has no title over the suit land and the plaintiff's suit deserves to be dismissed.