GOPIKABAI Vs. BAJYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises from a suit instituted by the appellant against the respondents for possession of Khasra Nos. 31 and 166 in Bhumidhari right, village Kuthkhedi, tahsil Multai. The relationship between the parties had been described in the plaint thus: Dewji i i i Jiwaji Dhondya Ghusya (wife Jhuli) Shioba Shyam -------- I II Sonu Bajya Punjya LMH Turji widow (Deft) (Deft) | ofjanaji Wife Sarji. | Gopika wife of Mukundrao (Plff) S7A. No. 377 of 1962, decided on 10-7-1968, from the appellate decree passed by R. K. Khatri, Additional District Judge, Betul, on 18-6-62, in C. A. No. 2-A of 1959, reversing the decree passed byJ. S. Sexena, C.J., CI. II, Multai, on 22-12-58 in C. S. No. 60-A of 1957. D/N. There is no dispute about the above genealogy.

(2.) PUNJYA, who was the owner of the suit land died in or about the year 1936. This land was ancestral in his hands. It originally belonged to Ghusya. On the death of PUNJYA in 1936, the estate devolved on his wife, Smt. Sarji. She continued in possession of the suit land until 6 November 1956, on which date she died. The issue between the parties is whether on the death of Smt. Sarji, Gopikabai, who is PUNJYA's sister's daughter, succeeds to the estate in preference to Sonu and Bajya (defendants), who are PUNJYA's father's brother' sons' sons.

(3.) TWO questions arise for decision in this appeal. It is contended by the appellant that the Hindu Succession Act applies to this case and sec- tion 4(2) of that Act is out of the way. That section reads thus :-