MURTI GOALIN Vs. RAM BRIKSHA GOPE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal the sole question which arises for determination is whether the appeal has abated, because of non-substitution of Mt. Gangia, the admitted sister of Shyam Lal, husband of defendant No. 1, on the death of the sole appellant, defendant No. 1, on the 23rd January, 1958.

(2.) In order to appreciate the points raised, it is necessary to state a few facts:

(3.) There was one Sheo Prasad, who had four sons -- Raja Ram, father of the plaintiff; Pokhan Ram (defendant No. 2), father of defendants 4 and 5; Shyam Lal, husband of Mt. Murti, (defendant No. 1), the sole appellant; and Sheonandan (defendant No. 3), who died issueless. Shyamlal, husband of defendant No. 1, Mt. Murti, had a concubine named Jagtarni Kuer, who died, after executing a deed of gift, in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the properties mentioned in Schedules 1 and 2. The plaintiff's case was that both the properties belonged to Jagtarni Kuer, and, therefore, she had the right to execute the deed of gift in respect of those properties in favour of the plaintiff.