JAWALA PRASAD Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is against an order of the Board of Revenue dated 30-12-1976 allowing the second appeal filed by contesting res pondent No. 4 and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Ad ditional Commissioner, Gorakhpur in an appeal against the judgment and decree of the Court of the first instance.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the respondent no. 4 filed a suit under Section 176 of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act for division of his holdings in which it was asserted that the plaintiffs had half share while the petitioner had the other half. THE suit was contested by the petitioner on the ground that there was a family arrangement between the defendant and the plaintiff under which the said defendant was to get 7/12 share whereas the plaintiff was to get 5/1 2 share of Shrimati Sunara, the aunt of the parties. THE trial Court decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff had half share according to the pedigree which was admitted to the parties while the remaining half belonged to the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contends that the aforesaid view of the Board of Revenue is manifestly erroneous in law. It was submitted that the agreement was with regard to a possible right which might have accrued in favour of the parties upon the death of Smt. Sunara. I cannot agree. The Board of Revenue is right in taking the view that a family arrangement family could be in regard to existing rights. It is not disputed that the time when the family arrangement is said to have been entered into, Smt. Sunara was alive. She was at liberty to dispose of her rights in her life time. There was at best a mere possibility or chance of the parties succeeding to Smt. Sunara in the event of her dying intestate. Under the circumstances, there could not be a binding family arrangement in respect of a mere chance of succession.