RAM BALI SINGH Vs. LAKSHMI KUAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the plaintiffs arises out of a suit for declaration that a deed of surrender executed by one Jasoda Kuer on the 18th July, 1944, in favour of Ramgulam Singh (original defendant No. I, who has since died) is illegal, inoperative and not binding upon the plaintiffs, and for confirmation of possession or, in the alternative, recovery of possession.

(2.) The 3rd Additional District Judge of Patna, who disposed of the appeal in the Court below, has given a genealogy of the family. It shows that Basti Singh had four sons, viz., Kashi, Nemchand, Kanhai and Jeolal. Ramgulam (original defendant No 1) was the grandson of Nemchand. According to the plaintiffs, Thakuri and Gokhul were two sons of Kanhai, and the two plaintiffs are grandsons of Gokul's son, Ranglal. Admittedly, Thakuri had three sons named Imrit, Jawahir and Parmeshwar. It is also admitted that Jawahir died earlier, leaving him surviving a widow named Jasoda Kuer, and that Parmeshwar died in 1937. The plaintiffs' case further is that the three brothers were joint in status so that, on Jawahir's death, Jasoda was entitled only to maintenance. On the other hand the defendants' case is that Gokul was not a son of Kanhai but was a son of Jeolal, the fourth son of Basti Singh, with the result that the appellants are not the grandsons of Kanhai's son, Gokul, but are the grandsons of Jeolal's son, Gokul. Their case further is that the three brothers, (SIC) Jawahir and Parmeshwar, were separate in status, and that Jasoda succeeded to Jawahir, and she came into possession of his properties as a Hindu widow. When Parmash-war died, the properties were also divided half and half Set ween Imrit and Jasoda.

(3.) I may further mention that the plaintiffs' case is that the deed of surrender executed by Jasoda in favour of Ramgulam on the I8th July. 1944, is illegal and inoperative, and that the plaintiffs are entitled to all the properties of the three sons of Thakuri, the son of Kanhai, because all those properties have been gifted to them by Imrit who was the last male holder of that branch of the family. The defendants' case is that the deed of surrender was valid, that Ramgulam was put in possession of all the properties held by Jasoda on the 18th July, 1944, and that the plaintiffs have no right or title to those properties.