MURLIDHAR NARAYAN Vs. DATTAJIRAO GANGARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal raises a question under S 14, Bombay Court of Wards Act, 1905, and the facts giving rise to the suit out of which the appeal arises are briefly these.

(2.) The property in auit in a house No. 30, situate in Khadki Juna Bazar in the and Ors. vs. Dattajirao Gangaram and Ors. (05.04.1951 - BOMHC) Page 2 of 8 Poona District. This property belonged to one Mabarudra Balwant Pandav. He died in 1900 leaving him surviving two sons, Ramkrishna and Gopal. Gopal died in 1902 leaving him surviving hia elder brother Ramkrishna and a widow by name Saraswatibai. Ramknahna himself died in 1908 leaving him surviving a, widow by name Laxmi-bai and a son by name Laxman, Laxmibai and Laxman died in the year 1913 but on the same day, Laxman having survived his mother. After the death of Laxman the property in suit was inherited by Saraawatibai, the widow of Gopal,

(3.) On 19th June 1920, Saraawatibai sold the Suit property to one Dr. Gangaram Hariba Shinde for Rs. 1225. Dr. Shinds was the father of defendants 1 to 3. During the lifetime of Dr. Shinde, the Court of Wards assumed management of his property in October of 1932. It appears that on 37th October 1932, a notification was published in the Gazette inviting claims relating to his property. On 95th December 1933, Dr. Shinde died and a fresh notification dated 20th March 1933, was issued inviting those claims. This a notification was publiahed in the Bombay Government Gazette on 23rd March 1933, and it was also published in an issue of "Dnyana Prakash" on 2nd April 1933. In accordance with the aforesaid notification the present plaintiffs, who are the maternal uncles of Laxman notified their claim to the Manager, Court of Wards, on 16th October 1933. In that notice the plaintiffs stated that the alienation made by Saraswatibai was unauthorised and that, as the hairs of Laxman they were entitled to the property in suit. To this notice a reply was given by the Manager, Court of Wards, on 20th November 1933, the notice and the reply being respectively Exs. 79 and 86. The reply recites that the notice dated 16th October 1933, was duly received and that it appeared that Saraswatibai bad obtained a certificate No. 273 of 1914, from the District Court which should be forwarded and upon receipt of the same the notice will be considered. The plaintiffs apparently did not move in the matter, and in the meanwhile the Court of Wards sold the suit property to defendant 2 on 6th April 1942, for a sum of RS. 2300.