BANABAI Vs. WASUDEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Bhoraji died in Sept. 1958 leaving behind him a widow by name Banabai and several agricultural properties and a house consisting of lands situated at villages Lasur, Dhanori and Nimbhora in Daryapur and Akot tahsils. On the 20th of February 1959 Banabai adopted Wasudeo who is the plaintiff in the present suit. On the same day a deed of adoption was executed by Banabai in favour of Wasudeo.

(2.) Banabai then filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 118 A of 1959 challenging the adoption by her of Wasudeo. That suit ultimately came to be dismissed by the trial Court and was also dismissed in appeal being Civil Appeal No. 223-A of I960 on 28th Nov. 1961. The adoption, therefore, was held legal and valid. On the 8th of July 1960 of the properties belonging to Bhoraji, Banabai sold one land Section No. 13/1 admeasuring 4 acres 10 gunthas of village Nimbhora in Akot tahsil to one Ragho.

(3.) The present suit, namely, Regular Civil Suit No. 14 of 1963 was filed on the 16th of Jan. 1963, wherein the plaintiff Wasudeo claimed a number of reliefs and, in particular, possession of land Section No. 13/1 of Nimbhora sold to Ragho. He set out in the plaint the circumstance that the plaintiff was an adopted son, and that the plaintiff was adopted as a result of the negotiations between the parties and an ante-adoption agreement preceding thereto. By that ante-adoption agreement, according to Wasudeo, he was to get "all rights of a natural born son to Banabai and deceased husband Bhoraji." Banabai also agreed, according to Wasudeo, that Wasudeo should become the owner of all the moveable and immoveable properties of Banabai and Bhoraji upon his adoption, and that Banabai was to be entitled only to maintenance and residence in the house. It was Wasudeo who was to have the right of management, possession and ownership of all moveable as well as immoveable properties. He then referred to the litigation after the adoption commenced by Banabai and the ultimate result therein. It is his complaint that the sale, therefore, by Banabai of Section No. 13/1 on the 8th of July 1960 in favour-of Ragho was invalid and Banabai had no right or ownership to the property. It was his contention that Banabai in collusion with the other defendants had taken forcible possession of the land and is continuing in possession. That in Criminal Case No. V4 of 1960 which was pending before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Akot under Section 145, Cr.P.C. was decided against him and, it is, therefore, that Wasudeo has been driven to filing this suit.