KR RAJENDRA BAHADUR SINGH Vs. KR ROSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This and the connected First Appeal No. 313 of 1944 arise out of a decree passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge of Bulandshahr in favour of the plaintiff, Cunwar Rajendra Bahadur Singh, Taluqdar of Haraha estate in the district of Bara Banki against the defendants Kunwar Roshan Singh and his son Kunwar Rajendra Pratap Singh, Zamindars of village Belon in the district of Buland Shahr. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiff while Appeal No 313 of 1944 is on behalf of the defendants. Some of the facts of this case are admitted. Defendants 1 and 2 both lived as members of a joint Hindu family of which defendant 1 is the karta. Dibya Kumari, the daughter of the plaintiff, was betrothed to defendant 2. No settlement was made with respect to dowry and the arrangement was that the plaintiff would give as much as he wished to give to the defendants as dowry for the marriage. The first ceremony which is known as the Barchhedan ceremony--which presumably means the ceremony of selecting the bridegroom--was performed on 16th June 1941. Thereafter the Tilak ceremony was performed on 1st November 1941 and the plaintiff's son went to Belon with certain presents for defendant 2. On 11th December 1941, the goda ceremony was performed in village Rani Katra, the residence of the plaintiff, when some presents were made to the bride. Thereafter a date was fixed for the marriage in the month of February 1942. The plaintiff's case is that after the goda ceremony had been performed, defendant 1 asked the plaintiff to pay him a sum of Rs. 15 000 in addition to the cash, ornaments, clothes and the elephant which had been presented by the plaintiff to defendants. The plaintiff did not agree to this new demand of defendant 1 and cancelled the marriage. In the meanwhile the girl fell ill and ultimately died on 12th February 1942. Thereafter defendant 1 entered into some correspondence with the plaintiff with the object of arranging a marriage for defendant 2 with the second daughter of the plaintiff, but the negotiations ultimately failed. Thereafter the plaintiff brought the suit against the defendants for the return of the cash, ornaments, clothes and the elephant which he had given to them in anticipation of his daughter's marriage with defendant 2 on two grounds. One of the grounds was that as defendant 1 had made an unreasonable demand for the payment of a sum of Rs. 15,000 from him he refused to marry his daughter to defendant 2 and thus put an end to the contract. The second ground was that the girl having died on 12th February 1942, the contract became void and he was therefore entitled to the return of the cash, the elephant and other articles which he had given to the defendants.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit on various grounds. Their case was that the presents which had been made by the plaintiff to the defendants were in the nature of a gift, pure and simple, and that they were not returnable to the plaintiff. It was said that the ceremonies preceding the actual ceremony of marriage were also in the nature of a sacrament like the marriage itself and that the gifts were not made as part of a contract of marriage. Much emphasis was laid on their behalf upon the fact that when the gifts were made they were accompanied by a sankalp made on behalf of the plaintiff. They also denied the correctness of the claim made on behalf of the plaintiff with respect to the gifts. They further claimed the return of the presents made on their behalf to the plaintiff's daughter and also claimed the amount which they had spent in entertaining guests and in other ways in connection with these ceremonies, particularly the Tilak ceremony.

(3.) The learned Civil Judge held that the betrothal of the plaintiff's daughter with defendant 2 was in the nature of a contract and that the Contract Act was applicable to the present case. He further held that in view of the death of the girl which had made the performance of the contract impossible the plaintiff was entitled to the return of the cash, the elephant and other articles which he had given to the defendants in anticipation of the marriage. He, however, accepted the defendants' contention that they were entitled to the return of the presents made on their behalf to the girl. As a matter of fact, their right to a return of the presents made on their behalf was admitted by the plaintiff in his plaint. The learned civil Judge also accepted the defendants' contention that they were entitled to the money spent by them in connection with the Tilak and other ceremonies. He, however, found that the defendants had not been able to produce satisfactory evidence with respect to their own claim and after considering the evidence was of opinion that they were entitled to a deduction of Rs. 3452-0-9 on account of the expenses legitimately incurred by them in connection with the Tilak and the Barchhedan ceremonies and a further sum of Rs. 5619-3-6 on account of presents made by them to the bride on the occasion of the goda ceremony. He accordingly decreed the plaintiff's claim for a sum of Rs. 12,495-12-0 less Rs. 9071-4-3 to which, according to his findings, the defendants were entitled on account of the expenses incurred, and the gifts made, by them in connection with the various ceremonies and he further directed the return of the articles, the elephant and the accessories given by the plaintiff to the defendants. In case they were not returned they were held liable to pay a further sum of Rs. 7983-13-3 to the plaintiff.