AVADESH BAHADUR SINGH Vs. RAM RAJ KUAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Ram Sarup Singh died about 1905 leaving a widow, Balraj Kuar, two sons, Mahabir Singh and Indarpal Singh and three daughters, Ram Raj Kuar, Partab Kuar and Jaipal Kuar. The two sons died shortly after their father (circa 1906) and their mother was their only heir. Accordingly mutation was effected in her favour and she obtained possession of the property, which included a 1 anna 9165/175 pie share in village Ghandra Bhanpur, in the district of Partabgarh. On 5-3 1919, Balraj Kuar sold the share to Thakur Badri Narain Singh for Rs. 4000. Badri Narain entered into possession and in December. 1935, when he applied under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act, he showed their share also in the list of his properties.

(2.) Balraj Kuar died in November, 1987, and on 11 3-1945, Bam Baj Kuar, Partab Kuar and Jaipil Kuar. filed the suit out of which this appeal arises against Badri Narain Singh for possession of the property on the ground that the sale in favour of Badri Narain was fictitious and without consideration. The defence was that daughters and sisters are excluded by custom from inheritance ; that the suit was barred by time since Balraj Kuar died over 14 years before the suit was filed ; that the sale was genuine and was for legal necessity ; and thas the suit was barred because the defendant had applied under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act, and consequently the only remedy open to the plaintiff was to apply under Section 11 of that Act.

(3.) The trial Court held that the alleged custom o! exclusion of daughters was not proved : that the suit was within limitation : that only Rs. 575 14-0 out of the consideration of the sale deed were justified by legal necessity : and that the suit was not barred by Section 11, Encumbered Estates Act. The learned Civil Judge accordingly decreed the suit for possession conditionally upon repayment of Es. 575-14-0.