BINDESHWARI PANDEY Vs. RAMAWATI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 29th Aug. 1992 by Sub-Judge II, Danapur in T.S. No. 18/82/69/90 by which the suit for partition after declaration of the two deeds of gift dated 01.07.1981 and 20.08.1981 as void and not binding on the plaintiff has been dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiff has filed the suit praying for declaration that the deed of gift dated 01.07.81 executed by Jagdish Pandey in favour of defendant no. 1 and another deed of gift dated 20.08.1981 executed by Jagdish Pandey in favour of defendant no. 1 are invalid void and not binding on the plaintiff and further for partition of his half share in the property described in schedule 2 of the plaint.

(3.) Filtering the unnecessary details, the plaintiff's case is that Nandu Pandey had two sons, namely, Tuna Pandey and Dhuna Pandey. The two brothers had separated and the plaintiff and the defendants belonged to the branch of Tuna Pandey and the suit properties admittedly had fallen to the share of Tuna Pandey in partition with his brothers. Tuna Pandey had three sons, namely, Dharichhan Pandey, Baleshwar Pandey and Jagdish Pandey. It is not in dispute that Baleshwar Pandey died and thereafter his widow also died issueless in the year 1971. Jagdish Pandey died but before his death he executed the two deeds of gift dated 01.07.81 and 20.08.81 in favour of the defendant no. 1 who is wife of Fakira Pandey son of Kameshwar Pandey. Dharichhan Pandey died in the year 1947 leaving behind his widow namely Dayawanti Devi and two sons Bindeshwar Pandey and Kameshwar Pandey out of whom Bindeshwar Pandey is the plaintiff in the suit and Kameshwar Pandey and his son Fakira Pandey are the defendant no. 2 and defendant no. 3 in the suit. The case of the plaintiff is that the deeds of gift from Jagdish pandey with regard to his share in the suit property had been obtained by practicing fraud, undue influence and under coercion. It is also the case of the plaintiff that there had been no partition in the family and therefore Jagdish Pandey being a member of the Joint Hindu Family could not have transferred by way of gift his share without partition of the Joint Hindu Properties.