KANDAN SOREN Vs. JITAN HEMBROM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this second appeal by the defendants the main question of law, which arises for decision, is whether a person, who is taken as gharjamai by an aboriginal in the district of Santal Parganas, loses his right to inherit the properties of his father-in-law, if his wife dies during the life time of the father-in-law. Another question of law, which arises, is whether such a son-in-law loses his right to inherit the properties of his father-in-law by remarrying another wife during the life time of his father-in-law or is divested of the properties inherited by him, if he remarries after the death of his father-in-law.

(2.) ONE Saibu died on the 28th January, 1960. He had a daughter Dulu, who predeceased him in 1354 B. S. The plaintiff-respondent was married with Dulu. These facts are not in dispute. According to the case of the plaintiff-respondent he was married in gharjamai form and succeeded to the properties of Saibu on his death. However, as the appellants, who are agnates of Saibu, started disturbing his possession, he had to institute the suit for declaration that he was gharjamai of Saibu and for confirmation of possession or in the alternative for recovery of possession of the properties in dispute.

(3.) BOTH the Courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff-respondent was married in gharjamai form and thus was entitled to succeed to the properties of Saibu. The trial Court accordingly decreed the suit and that decree has been affirmed in appeal by the lower appellate court. The lower appellate court has also observed that in view of the averments in the written statement the appellants could not urge that the plaintiff-respondent could not succeed to the properties of Saibu on the two grounds as aforesaid.