ANJANBAI Vs. RAMPRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts of the case in brief are that the plaintiffs/appellants filed a suit for possession of the house as shown in Schedule 'A' situated at village Jawalpur, Petwari Balkan No. 13, Tehsil Janjgir, District Bilaspur, on the ground that by registered sale deed dated 24-2-1955, they have purchased the suit house from one Satyabhama, widow of Nanki for the consideration of Rs. 900/-. There was a partition between the plaintiff/ appellant Nos. 1 and 2 and the property in suit fell in the share of plaintiff No. 1. The suit house was sold by Satyabhama for the purposes of purchasing another property situated at her parents' place at village Bhainsnudi. After the death of Satyabhama on 30/12/1979, on 31-12-1979 defendant/respondent Ramprasad took forcible possession of the suit property ousting plaintiff No. 1 Anjanbai, who was in possession of the same right from 24-2-1955. The defendant/respondent filed his written statement and denied allegations made in the plaint. In nut-shell, the defendant/ respondent's case is that the disputed house belongs to joint Hindu family of Satyabhama and the defendant/ respondent, and they were in joint possession of the same. After the death of Satyabhama he remained in possession of the suit house in his own right and, thus no decree for possession can be granted against him.

(2.) The trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs against which the plaintiffs had preferred appeal. The lower Appellate Court has recorded the findings that Satyabhama's husband Nanki died in the year 1955 and after the death of Nanki Satyabhama became limited owner of the suit property. Satyabhama transferred the suit property when she had not become the absolute owner of the suit property by virtue of S. 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. After the death of Satyabhama the property reversed back to the reversioner and, Ramprasad defendant being reversioner is in possession in his own right and he cannot be dispossessed by purchaser from Satyabhama i.e. by the plaintiffs and, consequently dismissed the appeal. The plaintiffs have preferred second appeal in the High Court which is registered as S.A. No. 68/1986. The High Court has framed the following substantial questions of law:-

(3.) To adjudicate the questions of law, it is necessary to find out the relationship between the parties and their respective right in the suit property. The whole family tree of Satyabhama and Ramprasad is given in paragraph 9 of the evidence of DW 1 Ramprasad. As per the statement, in paragraph 9, Bhagirath and Ayodhya Prasad were two brothers. Bhagirath had two sons, viz. Nanki and Atmaram, Nanki died in the year 1955; leaving behind his widow Satyabhama who died on 30/12/1979, Atmaram has also died leaving behind his widow who is still alive. Bhagirath's brother Ayodhya Prasad had 3 sons - Haldhan Prasad, Janki Prasad and Ramprasad the defendant. That there was a partition between Bhagirath and Ayodhya Prasad and; thereafter there was a partition between Nanki and Atmaram the sons of Bhagirath of the properties allotted in partition. The property in suit fell in the share of Nanki. On these admitted facts by the defendant, it is clear that Nanki died in the year 1955; after the death of Nanki, Satyabhama became owner of the suit property, who died on 30/12/1979, and Atmaram brother of Nanki has died leaving behind his widow who is still alive. Ramprasad is Nanki's uncle's son.