ANJANABAI Vs. ASWANTIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two judgments which are under challenge in the aforesaid two appeals arise from common evidence both documentary and oral led in the two cases before the learned trial Court. It will be convenient to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment. Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of accordingly.

(2.) CIVIL Suit No. 177 of 1975 was filed by the three daughters of Durgaji Bhange, namely, Anjanabai, Bhimbai and Chindhabai for declaration and partition of Khasra Nos. 72, 73, 74/1 and 76/1 situated at Mouza Parsodi, Tq. and District Nagpur. It is alleged in the plaint that the said Durgaji died in the year 1962 leaving behind the three duaghters who are the plaintiffs and five sons, namely, Ganashyam, Narayan, Shamrao, Sitaram and Ramdas - the defendant Nos. 8 to 12. The plaintiffs are all married. After the death of Durgaji, the suit fields were inherited by the plaintiffs and defendants 8 to 12. It is further alleged in the plaint that Durgaji and his sons managed the property in suit. Durgaji himself was indebted to the extent of Rs. 2550/- or so. This debt could have easily been paid by defendant Nos. 8 to 12 from and out of the income of the agricultural property. The sons of Durgaji, that is the defendant Nos. 8 to 12, at the instance of one Mithalal Maheswari, who was a friend of defendant No. 8, prevailed upon him and his brothers to sell away the suit fields representing that they would get purchasers who could pay a good price. The suit fields were hence sold to Jaswantibai - defendant No. 1, Tarabai -defendant No. 5, Hansagauri - defendant No. 6, Dhirajbai - defendant No. 6 (a), Narmadabai - defendant No. 7 and one Kashibai for consideration of Rs. 24,000/- only. The plaintiffs claimed 1/8th share each in the suit fields. The three plaintiffs together claimed 3/8th share in the suit fields. The plaintiffs claimed that the sale of suit fields in respect of their share is not binding upon them and the sale-deed is void. The 3/8th share in the suit fields would be 5. 40 acres. They claimed that they are in possession of the suit fields. The plaintiffs prayed for a declaration that the alleged sale-deed registered on 25-2-1963 in respect of 3/8th share is not binding on them apart from the claim for preliminary decree of partition in 14. 99 acres of the suit fields.

(3.) THE sons of Durgaji Bhange remained absent. They were hence proceeded ex parte. The defendants 1 to 8, however, contested the suit. They denied that the deceased Durgaji alone owned the suit fields. Durgaji Bhange held extensive immovable and movable property. The plaintiffs are the daughters of Durgaji and the defendant Nos. 8 to 12 are his sons. Durgaji lived with his five sons and the whole unit formed a joint Hindu family. Even after the death the family continued to be joint, holding joint family property, including the suit fields. The answering defendants denied that the plaintiffs and her five brothers are the joint owners of the suit property. Initially Durgaji and his five sons managed the joint family property and after the death of Durgaji, the defendant Nos. 8 to 12 managed the same and Narayan the defendant No. 8 was the manager. The answering defendants denied that the income from the property was sufficient to meet the expenses of the family, particularly during 1960 to 1962 when there was no agricultural income. The indebtedness to the extent of Rs. 2250/- only was emphatically denied. There were many other liabilities which are well described in the sale-deed executed by defendant Nos. 8 to 12 in favour of other defendants. All these liabilities were incurred for the maintenance of the family and defraying debts incurred in the interest of the family. Durgaji was ill prior to his death and the family went through great financial difficulties.