SHANKAR GANPAT SARPHARE Vs. MARUTI HAIBAT SARPHARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second Appeal has got to be allowed on the narrowest possible ground that the decrees passed by the trial court and confirmed by the lower Appellate court have been passed without reference to the relevant legal provisions.

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows: - It is unnecessary to set out the numbers of the suit lands. The suit lands are eight in number. Land serial Nos.1 to 6 and 8 form one parcel of land and land serial No. 7 forms the second parcel of the land. For the sake of convenience, I will refer the said lands as the lands of first parcel and the lands of second parcel. So far as the lands of the first parcel are concerned, there is no dispute that initially, that is to say, in and before the year 1922, those lands belonged to one Godabai. It is the contention of the present respondents, who were the original defendants Nos.1 to 8, that Godabai gave those lands to them for vahivat and they had been in vahivat of the same since that year. On 12-1-1928 Godabai executed a gift-deed in respect of the said lands of the first parcel in favour of one Laxman. Godabai's daughters name was Aubai and Laxman was the husband of said Aubai, that is to say, the son-in- law of Godabai, contention of defendants Nos.1 to 8 is thata the said gift-deed is hit by the provisions of the Khoti settlement Act, 1880 . The crux of the question is as to whether this contention has any substance at all.

(3.) To continue the chronology of events, Godabai died some time in the year 1936. At about the same time, the father of the plaintiff, who is the appellant before me, came to reside in the village in which the lands are situate. I am standing this position because there is no dispute about these facts. Laxman died some time before 1958. On 2-1-1948 Aubai executed the saldeed, Ex.75, in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit lands, parcel No.1. The sale- deed purported to have been executed by her as the guardian of her sons. It is, however, common ground in these proceedings: