RAJARAM Vs. DINDAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decree, dated 3/9/1965, passed by the First Additional District Judge, Sagar, in Civil Appeal No. 71-A of 1965, affirming the decree, dated 20/7/1964, passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Class II, Sagar, in Civil Suit No. 69-A of 1963 dismissing the plaintiff's suit for possession of agricultural property as also non-agriculture property consisting of a house.

(2.) THE genealogy of the parties is as under :- Gulli|(died) I I Girdharilal (died 17-5-1920) Nandoo =Mst. Ladlibai (died 9-4-1960) | Gajadhar (died) I I Konsabai (died 1943) Nanhibai (died 1941) |- Dindayal Parmeshwardas |-: | | | (deft. 1) (deft. 2) Narbadabai Rajaram Ramnarayan Gayaprasad (Ori. deft. 5 (Org. deft. 6 (Plaintiff- (Org. Deft. 4 but subsequently discharged) but subsequently Appellant) but subsequently discharged from discharged) 8Ul [Material portion only reproduced]

(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY, Ladlibahu executed a registered sale deed, dated 27-5-1952 in favour of Rameshwar Prasad, one of the discharged defendants, and later she executed a registered gift deed, dated 21-3 1957, in favour of the present respondents, who may be said to be remoter reversioners than the sons or the daughters of the two daughters of Ladlibahu. But at this stage, it may be pertinent to note that in the year 1942, as is clear from the mutation record Ex. P /6, the names of Ladlibahu, Ramnarayan and Gayaprasad were mutated in the revenue papers in respect of the suit property. However, as is clear from the mutation register Ex. P /7, the names of Ramnarayan and Gayaprasad were deleted, leaving the name of Ladlibahu alone against the suit property. Similarly, the revenue records consisting of Khasras and Jamabandis, showed the names of the said parties according to the changes effected in the mutation register.