MALAY KUMAR DEY Vs. DURGA NARAYAN SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BACKDROP

(2.) The parties however resolved their dispute. The settlement was recorded in writing through an Indenture dated April 20, 1929. By the said Indenture both the wives recognized each other to be the widow of the deceased. Christabel allowed withdrawal of money from banks by Radharani. She also paid Rs.6500/- in cash to Radharani. Radharani got Rs.20037-6-9. It was agreed, Rs.15000/- would be invested in an appropriate account, the interest of which would be used by Radharani and Rasheswari during their life time. After their demise, the male children of Rasheswari would get it in equal share absolutely. The Indenture however gave an absolute right to the balance sum of Rs.5037-6-9/- to Radharani Devi with liberty to spend the same as per her likings and without any objection, if any, raised by Rasheswari or her male children. In exchange, Patna properties were retained by Christabel and her children. We also find another document dated October 2, 1931 being a Declaration made by Radharani to the effect that she had purchased a house at 9, Panchanantala Lane, Calcutta in a Court auction on June 5, 1931. By the said Declaration, Radharani recorded that she was the full owner and proprietor of the premises in question and one Janoki Nath Sen did not have any right over the same. In 1979, Radharani died leaving her surviving her sole heir Rasheswari. Rasheswari died on May 12, 1979 leaving her surviving Durga Narayan Sen and Satya Narayan Sen (hereinafter referred to as Sens), Tara Dey, Smt. Mira Dey and Gouri Laha being her children. By a Deed of Indenture dated August 10, 1993 Durga and Satya being the respondent no.1 and 2 duly conveyed the property in favour of Shri Nirmal Chandra Bhattacharya and Smt. Lili Bhattacharya (hereinafter referred to Bhattacharyas) being the respondent no.4 and 5 who were already in part possession of the house as tenant. The respondent no.6 to 10 were the other tenants.

(3.) Bhattacharjees filed ejectment suit as against the tenants being the respondent no.6 to 10 and ultimately obtained decree of eviction against them that was affirmed up to the Apex Court level. During the pendency of the said proceeding the appellant being one of the grand children (Daughters branch) of Rasheswari filed a suit being Title Suit no.2680 of 1997 inter alia praying for a Declaration that the scheduled property being 9, Panchanantala Lane, Calcutta was a joint property of the estate of Rasheswari and thus was liable to partition. The Deed of Conveyance executed on August 13, 1993 was liable to be declared null and void. He made the other heirs of the daughter brunch as proforma defendants being respondent no.11, 12 and 13 above named. He also made the tenants as parties including both Durga Narayan Sen and Satya Narayan Sen as also Bhattacharjees.