LAWS(GJH)-1997-8-20

HALIMABIBI Vs. ABDUL RAHEMAN ABDUL RAHIM

Decided On August 14, 1997
HALIMABIBI Appellant
V/S
ABDUL RAHEMAN ABDUL RAHIM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed by Extra Assistant Judge, Surat in Regular Civil Appeal No. 194 of 1977 of 22-1- 1979 affirming the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1977 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 368 of 1971 by Joint Civil Judge (J.D.), Surat by which the preliminary decree was passed in suit filed by the one Abdul Rehman for administration of the property left by Abdul Rahim Abdul Razak. The following three substantial questions were framed by this Court while admitting appeal which were required to be considered in this appeal : "

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellants has pressed only Question No. 3 referred to above and therefore, other two questions deemed to have been abandoned.

(3.) Facts essential for the decision of the aforesaid Question No. 3 may be noticed. Parties are Sunni Muslims. Abdul Rahim Abdul Razak has married thrice in his life time. Plaintiff and respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are the children of Abdul Rahim through his first wife Aminabibi, who died in years 1943. Plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are the sons, defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are the daughters. The second marriage of Abdul Rahim with Jebunnisa resulted in divorce. Through this wedlock, defendant Nos. 5, 6 and 7 were born. Thereafter said Abdul Rahim married present appellant No. 1 and defendant No. 8. Out of this wedlock three sons and four daughters were born who are defendant Nos. 9 to 15 and appellant Nos. 2 to 8. Said Abdul Rahim died on 19-12-1968 at Surat leaving behind properties which included house property No. 2447 at Ward No. 11 and 2 rented rooms 232 to 238 situated at Limbda Chowk, Surat. He was residing in the house along with his third wife and children through her, all minors. On 18-6-1968 Abdul Rahim had executed registered gift deed making gift of his property bearing Registration Entry No. 2447 in favour of the present appellants. It is this gift which is bone of contention between the parties in this appeal.