AHMED ALI KHAN BAHADUR DIED Vs. BANGULURU VEERALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a connected batch of Letters Patent Appeals against the Judgment of Subba Rao. L.P.A. Nos. 67 and 73 to 81 of 1954 are against A.S. Nos. 199 of 1948 and A.S. Nos. 352 to 359 and 360 of 1950 on the file of the High Court of Madras which arise out of O.S. No. 16 of 1947 and other 9 connected suits On the file of the Sub-Court, Tenali. Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 68 to 72 of 1954 are against the decision in Civil Miscellaneous Appeals Nos. 442 to 446 of 1948 which arise out of the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Bapatla dismissing E.A. Nos. 27ft to 287 of 1945. L.P. As. Nos. 33 and 34 of 1955 are against the decision of Subba Rao, C. J., in S. As. Nos. 100L and 1130 of 1950 arising out of A.S. Nos. 505 and 506 of 1948 on the file of the District Judge, Guntur against O.S. Nos. 59 and 60 of 194T on the file of the Sub-Court, Bapatla.

(2.) Though the questions raised in these appeals-are common,, it would be convenient to deal with them separately. We will first deal with L.P.A. Nos. 67 and 73 to 81 of 1954. 2A. It would be necessary to set out in brief outline the essential facts of this protracted and complicated litigation.

(3.) One Nawab Nazim-Ud-Dowla described as the Nawab of Bandar was possessed of considerable properties including those in question in these appeals. He died in 1898 leaving behind him a number of wives and children by them. One of his sons filed a suit for partition and separate possession of the properties in the District Court of Guntur numbered as O.S. No. 17 of 1906. The suit was transferred to the Temporary Subordinate Judges Court at Guntur and numbered as O.S. No. 2.1 of 1909. A preliminary decree was, passed on 21-7-1910 and eventually the final decree was passed on 19-7-1911. Under the final decree, Hussain All Khan the 1st defendant to the partition action obtained about 124 acres of land in Cheruvu village for his shore. All the heirs of the late Nawab were added ad parties to the suit including one Shaukat Begam the 7th defendant who was stilted to be one of the Nawabs wives. However, in the suit, it was found that she was not shadi wife but that her marriage was performed in the mutta form and so she was not given any share in the partition decree. The said Shoukat Begum thereupon filed O.S. No. 14 of 1914 on the file of the Sub-Court, Masulipatnam for a declaration that the decree in O.S. No. 21 of 1909 was obtained by fraud in so far as her interests were concerned and she prayed for a declaration that she was shadi wife of the late Nawab and as such entitled to l/8th share. She also made a claim as the heir of her deceased daughter and in all to 103/768th share of the properties described in all the schedules annexed to the plaint and for past and future profits.