BANDU ANNAJI NAIK Vs. YESHWANT RAMRAO DESAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 against a decree for possession of the suit property in favour of the plaintiffs. The facts shortly are :-The property belonged originally to one Gangaram, whose daughter is plaintiff No. 2. After his death in September, 1909, the property came into the possession of his widow Irawa. The second plaintiff was bom in the same month on September 14, 1909. Irawa re-married in 1912, and after her remarriage she sold the suit property to defendant No. 7 in 1913. In 1918, defendant No. 7 sold it to defendant No. 1, who, along with his brother defendant No. 2, is in possession thereof. In May, 1930, plaintiff No. 2 sold her right to recover the property as a reversioner to the first plaintiff, and both the plaintiffs, i.e. the daughter as well as her vendee, have brought the present suit in 1930.

(2.) Plaintiffs' case was that the sale by Irawa to defendant No. 7 and the subsequent sale,to defendant No. 1 were both unauthorised and without necessity and therefore void, and that, therefore, the second plaintiff had a right to recover the property as a reversioner.

(3.) Defendants claim that the sale-deed by Irawa to their vendor was justified by legal necessity and that they were bona fide purchasers for value without notice. There were other contentions which are not material for the purpose of this appeal.