KUNDAN SINGH Vs. HARDAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a letters patent appeal by defendant 2 and the legal representatives of defendant 1, Mukhtar Singh. The plaintiff respondent Hardan Singh claimed that he was a son of Har Lal Singh who died in the year 1920, that he and his elder brother Mukhtar Singh were members of a joint Hindu family, that on Har Lal Singh's death in 1920 Mukhtar Singh was the head of the family and that on 20-12-1927, he had executed a mortgage in favour of Zabar Singh, defendant 3, which mortgage being without legal necessity was not binding on him (plaintiff). The plaintiff claimed that defendant 2, Tej Singh, had a simple money decree against Har Lal Singh, that in execution of that decree some property had been sold which was purchased by Tej Singh, defendant 2, and that as the plaintiff was not a party to the execution proceedings he was not bound by the same. On these allegations the plaintiff claimed possession of a half share in the property in suit.

(2.) The suit was contested by all the three defendants and it was alleged that Hardan Singh was not a son of Har Lal Singh. The defendants' case was that Har Lal Singh's wife Bhup Kuer had become unchaste and that Har Lal Singh had turned her out about the year 1895. Bhup Kuer thereafter filed an application for maintenance under Section 488, Criminal P. C. which was dismissed by the Magistrate on the grounds that she was living in adultery with one Umrao Singh and that Hardan Singh had been born of this adulterous intercourse on l-3-1903. It was alleged in the alternative that the mortgage and the auction sale were binding on the plaintiff as they were for legal necessity to pay off antecedent debts.

(3.) The trial Court held that Hardan Singh was a legitimate son of Harlal Singh. It decided the other issues also against the defendants and decreed the plaintiff's suit.