SUKLAL Vs. RAMGOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's appeal from a decree for possession and mesne profits.

(2.) THE subject -matter of the suit is malik -makbuza field No. 76/1, area 4.90 acres, land revenue Rs. 16 -8 -0 of mouza Piplaj, Tahsil Burhanpur. It belonged to Jagannath who died on 27 -11 -1940, bequeathing it to Mankibai by will, dated 18th December, 1947. Appellant No. 2, Madangopal, Is the cousin and next heir of Jagannath. He sold the field to the first appellant Suklal on 29 -1 -1947 during the pendency of civil suit No. 2 -A of 1943, which he had instituted against the executors for partition of the testator's estate including the field in dispute. That suit was compromised on 3rd March 1947 whereby a decree for possession of the field was passed on consent in favour of the executors. It was admitted before me that this decree was not collusive or fraudulent and bound the first appellant on the doctrine of lis pendens. The matter, however, does not rest here,

(3.) THE law on the nature of the estate that is created in favour of a Hindu female by a disposition of property was recently set down in Ram Gopal vs. Nand Lal : A.I.R. (1951) S.C. 139 Their Lordships held in that case that there was no warrant for the proposition that when a grant of an immoveable property is made to a Hindu female, she does not get an absolute or alienable interest in such property, unless such power is expressly conferred upon her. Their conclusion was stated in these terms: -