BISHAN DAYAL Vs. LAKSHMI NARAIN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the plaintiff gains( the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Civil Judge of Aligarh arises out of a suit for possession over certain property specified at the foot of the plaint and for recovery of damages and mesne profits past, pendente lite and future.

(2.) The following pedigree will be of help in understanding the facts of the case:

(3.) The sole question which has been argued on behalf of the appellant is that the finding of the court below to the effect that the decree in suit No. 348 of 1918 is binding on the plaintiff Bishan Dayal is incorrect. It has been contended that the decree in that suit was given on the basis of estoppel which was something personal to the widow, Smt. Jagrani Kunwar, and that, therefore, the reversioner Bishan Dayal cannot be legally bound by it. The law on the subject is stated thus in Mulla's Hindu Law, thirteenth edition at page 231 para 199: