KUMARI RAMLALI Vs. BHAGUNTI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Letters Patent appeal from a decision of Pandey J. whereby the learned single Judge, setting aside the judgments of the original Court and the first appellate Court, dismissed the plaintiff-appellant Ramlali's suit for partition and separate possession of certain agricultural plots.

(2.) THE material facts are that one Ramnath died in February 1954 leaving two widows, one Mst. Bilasabai and another Mst. Bhaguntibai, and two daughters, the appellant Kumari Ramlali and Kumari Keshbai born of Mst Bilasabai. At the time of his death Ramnath held some plots situated in villages Deori and Tigwan on bhumiswami and Bhumidhati tenure. After his death his two widows jointly inherited the plots. Mst. Bilasabai died on 19th March 1957. Thereafter disputes started between Mst. Bhaguntibai and the two daughters of Mst. Bilasabai about the possession of the plots. Ultimately, in proceedings under Section 145 of the code of Criminal Procedure an order was made in favour of Bhaguntibai. On 9th april 1958 Bhaguntibai sold one of the plots, namely khasra No. 29th having an area of 13. 47 acres of village Tigwan to the respondents nos. 2 to 5.

(3.) RAMLALI and her sister Keshbai then instituted a suit claiming partition and separate possession of half share of the plots in suit alleging that on the death of their mother Bilasabai they inherited Bilasabai's half share in the plots. The respondent Bhaguntibai contested the suit inter alia on the ground that on the death of her co-widow Bilasabai, she became the exclusive owner of the plots and that the plaintiffs had no right or title to the plots during her lifetime. The plea of the other respondents was that they were bona fide purchasers for value of the plot bearing khasra no. 296 and had also spent Rs. 2,000 in making some improvements in the plots. The Civil Judge. Class II. Sihora, who tried the suit, accepting the plaintiffs' claim passed a preliminary decree against Bhaguntibai declaring that the plaintiffs had a half share in the plots and directing partition of the suit lands He also directed that "the value or area of khasra No. 296 will be adjusted from the share of the defendant No. 1, that is Bhaguntibai" Bhaguntibai then unsuccessfully appealed before the Additional District Judge. Jabalpur. It appears from the record that in the interval between the decreeing of the claim by the original Court and the filing of the appeal by Bhaguntibai, Keshbai died.