BAIKUNTH SINGH Vs. JHULAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit in which the plaintiffs sought to recover possession of half share in certain lands described in Schedules I and II of the plaint on declaration of his title thereto. The property in suit belonged to one Molan Singh who died leaving a widow Mt. Manmati Kuer. Manmati Kuer came into possession of the property as a limited owner, but as she alleged that she had two daughters, Rudar Singh the father of the plaintiff-appellant, and Jhulan Singh and Janardan Singh, defendants 1 and 2 respectively of this suit, had to institute a suit for a declaration that Mt. Urehan KUER and Alodhan Kuer who had been set up by Mt. Manmati Kuer as her daughters were really not her daughters. This suit was Title Suit No. 60 of 1929 and while it was pending Rudar Singh died and the present appellant was substituted in his place. A deed of ekrarnama was executed on 20th December 1930 by the plaintiff Baikunth Singh and defendants 1 and 2 and one of the terms of this ekrarnama was that in the event of the suit succeeding the plaintiff would be entitled to the same share in the property in dispute to which his father Rudar Singh would have been entitled. This suit ended in a decree in favour of the plaintiffs, and after the termination of that suit defendants 1 and 2 obtained from Mt. Manmatia deed of surrender with regard to the property which was the subject-matter of the suit and after the surrender they settled some lands out of the said property with Damodar Singh, defendant 4 by a deed of settlement. The execution of the deed of surrender and the settlement with defendant 4 have been mentioned in the plaint as the cause of action for the present suit which was commenced on 27th June 1942. The plaintiff has prayed for a declaration that the deed of surrender in favour of defendants 1 and 9 and the patta, executed by them in favour of defendant 4 are fraudulent and inoperative documents and that by virtue of the ekrarnama which had been executed on 20th December 1930 the plaintiff is entitled to half share in the property which was the subject matter of Title suit No. 60 of 1929 and which is also the subject-matter of this present suit. Mt. Manmati died daring the pendency of this suit, and after her death the plaintiff amended the plaint and added a prayer for recovery of khas possession of one-half share in the disputed land.

(2.) The principal defendants, namely, defendants 1 and 2, contested the plaintiff's claim and their main defence was that by virtue of the agreement embodied in the ekrarnama dated 20th December 1930 no title to the property in suit had passed to the plaintiff, inasmuch as the agreement is hit by Section 6 (a), T. P. Act, which forbids the transfer of expectancies or a mere spes successionis.

(3.) The contention of the defendants has found favour with the Courts below and the suit has accordingly been dismissed.