REWA WIDOW OF DHONDU SINGH Vs. GALHARSINGH KANHAISINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the widow or one Dhondusingh who had filed a civil suit for partition and separate possession of his 1/6th share in that which he alleged to be his coparcenary property. The suit was decreed by the trial Court. On appeal, the District Judge, Chhindwara, set aside that decree and dismissed the suit. Hence this appeal.

(2.) THE claim of Dhondusingh was based on the fact that Chindhusingh, his father, was born of a lawful marriage between Kanhaisingh, an admitted coparcener of the joint Hindu family and one Jamna and that the question of the validityof the said marriage was also res judicata by reason of the decision in second appeal No. 225 of 1907 dated 30 -8 -1907 (Ex. P -2). The defendants who were the other members of the joint family contested the suit on various grounds. They denied the legality and validity of the marriage between Kanhaisingh and Jamna, as also the fact that the question was res judicata as alleged. They further pleaded that even if the plaintiff were a member of the joint family, his claim was barred by adverse possession. The trial Court] held that the marriage of Kanhaisingh with Jamna was legal and valid, that the question of its validity was concluded by the decision in second appeal No. 225 of 1907 which operated as res judicata and that the plaintiff's claim was not barred by adverse possession. On appeal, the defence of the adverse possession was again negatived but the suit was dismissed inter alia on the grounds that:

(3.) JAMNA remarried Kanhaisingh in 1887 in 'Pat form'. The fact that such a 'Pat' marriage in fact took place is not denied. Nor has it been disputed before me that the children of the aforesaid marriage were never treated as illegitimate. On the death of Kanhaisingh in 1915 his 2 anna proprietary share in villages Ulhawadi and Murra was mutated jointly in the names of Chindhusingh, the father of the plaintiff Dhondusingh, and the other sons of Kanhaisingh and in subsequent mutation also on the death of Daulatsingh, Chindhusingh and Kamodsingh, the legitimacy of the branch of Chindhusingh was never questioned.