MOTILAL MANDAL Vs. CHONI MANDALANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the defendants from the decision of Mr. S.M. Karim, Subordinate Judge, Dhanbad, decreeing the suit for partition of the plaintiff to the extent of her 1/6th share. There was one Dhaju Mandal, whose widow is defendant No. 5. Dhaju Mandal and his wife, defendant No. 5, had five sons namely, defendants 1 to 4 and one Jyoti Mandal, who predeceased his father Dhaju Mandal. The widow of Jyoti Mandal is the present plaintiff. She has brought the present suit for partition basing her claim on the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937 (Act XVIII of 1937).

(2.) The main defence of the defendants-appellants was that whatever moveable and immovcable properties Dhaju Mandal had, he, during his lifetime about seven years ago, which would be 1941-42, divided them equally amongst his four sons, namely, defendants 1 to 4; and, he also made provision for the maintenance and upkeep of the plaintiff and for her residence, by allotting to her one room for her residence within the family dwelling house and also by enjoining upon defendants 1 to 4 to give her each 10 maunds of paddy every year, and, since then defendants 1 to 4 have been living separately and cultivating separately the lands allotted to them, and, they have also been delivering paddy to the plaintiff at the rate enjoined by their rather. On this defence, it was suggested that the plaintiff was not entitled to any share in the property belonging to Dhaju Mandal, and, therefore, her suit was not maintainable.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge has negatived the family arrangement set up by the defendants; but, for the purpose of the present appeal I will assume that there was such a family arrangement, and, I will consider only the question whether such a family arrangement, even if there was one, was binding on the plaintiff which could defeat the plaintiff's suit for partition.