(1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment and decree of Mr. Sansar Chand Bhandari, District judge, Hoshiarpur, dated 1-12-1948 allowing an appeal against the decree of the trial Court which had dismissed the plaintiff's suit.
(2.) IN order to understand the case it is necessary to refer to the pedigree-table. BHOLA ________________________|______________________________ | | | attar Singh = Mt. Radbi Bhana (died issueless) Rall (sic) = Mt Hukam | | (deft. 2)| Gurditta Ram (alleged _______|_________________ adopted son)| | ch. Gurditta Ram Sundar Ram = Mt Ram Kuar (deft. 1) (deceased) (plaintiff)Chaudhri Gurditta Ram is alleged to have been adopted by Bhana, his uncle (Father's Brother ). Ram Kaur plaintiff is the widow of Sundar Ram, a predeceased son of Attar Singh. On the death of Attar Singh disputes arose as to succession to his estate between Gurditta Ram and Ram Kaur, the widow of the predeceased brother. Ram Kaur brought a suit for possession claiming that she was entitled to the estate of Attar Singh because Gurditta Ram had been adopted by Bhana and had therefore lost his right of succession to the estate left by his natural father and in the alternative she claimed the land in lieu of maintenance. The parties are Sainis and are governed by custom of the Hoshiarpur District.
(3.) THE trial Court held that Gurditta Ram had not been adopted and that Ram Kaur was the widow of a predeceased son and therefore she was entitled only to maintenance and Gurditta ram was entitled to exclude her and succeed to the estate of his father Attar Singh. On appeal the District Judge found that Bhana had not only made a will in favour of Gurditta Ram but had also adopted him, that according to the custom of Sainis of this district a widow of a predeceased son had the right to succeed to her father-in-law's estate and that as Gurditta Ram had been adopted in another family he could not succeed in his natural family and therefore Ram Kaur was entitled to the whole of the estate left by Attar Singh.