RAMCHANDRA BARMA MALI Vs. MAHADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for respondents.

(2.) The present appellants were the plaintiffs, and the respondents were the defendants. The plaintiffs had filed a suit to declare ownership and recover possession of the agricultural field and house property. The suit of the plaintiffs was based upon an award passed on 14/7/1941 in Regular Civil Suit No.1018 of 1940 before the Court. In pursuance of the settlement terms, the suit properties were handed over to one Kashibai Dashrath Mali, who was admittedly the legal heir from the common ancestor Arjun. It is the case of the plaintiffs that in the said award, the restricted rights were conferred upon Kashibai to enjoy the suit properties till her lifetime in lieu of maintenance. Hence, her rights were restricted. However, on 31/12/1966, she executed a Will in favour of the defendants, and the defendants were claiming the title through that Will. Before executing the Will, the defendants were in possession as a lessee of deceased Kashibai. The plaintiffs have a case that since Kashibai had no absolute title to the suit properties, she cannot dispose of the suit properties by way of Will. Therefore, the defendant cannot acquire the title. Consequently, they are entitled to the possession and declaration that they are the exclusive owners of the suit properties.

(3.) The defendant contested the suit. They have pleaded that Kashibai has the absolute rights in the suit properties. There was no dispute about the suit filed by Kashibai in the year 1940 and the passing of the award. The execution of the Will is also not disputed by either of the parties. Neither of the parties to the suit led the evidence, and the suit proceeded ahead. The learned Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court, dismissed the suit.