INDERJEET SINGH Vs. KRISHEN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit by the plaintiffs who are the sons of defendant No. 2 for setting aside certain alienations made by their father defendant No. 2 on the ground that the debts contracted under those alienations were tarnished with immorality and being neither for legal necessity nor antecedent debts, were not binding on the plaintiffs to the extent of their shares in the joint family property. The plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor sons of defendant No. 2 and have filed this suit through their next friend Shrimati Durga Devi, who is the mother of the plaintiffs.

(2.) PUT briefly the plaintiff case is as follows: -

(3.) THE suit was, however, contested by defendant N. 1 who pleaded interalia that the suit was not maintainable in its present form and that the properties in question were self acquired properties Janak Singh defendant No. 2 and that the plaintiffs had, therefore, no locus standi to bring the present suit. In this connection defendant No. 1 of pleaded that Rattan Singh father to defendant No. 2 was not possessed of sufficient means and the property in question was really acquired by the earnings of and funds in possession of defendant No. 2 Janak Singh. It was further alleged that as Janak Singh was a close relation of His Highness Maharaja Bahadur, he used to get huge sums of money from the Raj Mata and it was from this money that the property in dispute was originally acquired and then built upon. Defendant further denied the allegation regarding want of necessity and antecedent debts. Defendant No. 1 further averred that the various transactions were entered into by defendant No. 2 for necessities of the family and other matters and that the consideration under those transactions was actually paid to defendant No. 2 Defendant No. 1 also denied the insinuation of the plaintiffs that the debts were contracted for immoral purpose.