JADIBAI Vs. HARSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS Harsingh and his three brothers filed the present suit out of which this second appeal arises on the allegations that the agricultural holding in suit had been purchased by Plaintiffs' father Kishan from the Defendant Jadibai for a consideration of Rs. 150 and that sanction for the sale had been obtained from the Subha as far back as in the year 1(sic)32; that the Plaintiffs' father and after his death the Plaintiffs had been in occupation from that time till 25 -6 -1953 when the Defendant Jadibai taking advantage of the circumstance that Plaintiff No. 1 Harsingh had been imprisoned in connection with a criminal case took forcible possession of the land The Plaintiffs therefore claimed possession on the strength of the alleged purchase.

(2.) THE Defendant Jadibai denied the Plaintiffs' assertions. She denied that she had sold the suit land or that any sanction from the Subha had been obtained by her. She also denied receipt of Rs. 150 as the consideration for the sale. She asserted her own title and possession over the suit land. She denied her having committed trespass in the year 1953 as alleged. In her special pleadings she asserted that during the minority of her son the Plaintiffs taking advantage of her position as a helpless woman forcibly took possession of her land but that on her son attending majority he got back the land.

(3.) THIS is a second appeal against that decision.