KISHAN LAL Vs. SOHANLAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two connected appeals from the judgment of the Chief Court of the former state of Marwar, and have come up before us for disposal under Ordinance No. 40 of 1949, and Ordinance No. 12 of 1950.

(2.) WE may give a brief history of this litigation as that will help in understanding the questions involved in these appeals. One Ganesh was the jagirdar of village Malpuria. He died sometime in 1931, and a dispute arose as to the succession of his jagir. Two sets of claimants appeared on the scene. One set consisted of Mohanlal alone who claimed that he was entitled to the jagir of Malpuria on the ground that he was the adopted son of Ganesh. The other set consisted of Sohanlal and others who contended that Mohanlal was not entitled to the jagir on the ground that he was not in the line of the Murisala, and that they were entitled to the jagir as collaterals being in the line of Murisala. These disputes were considered by the Revenue Minister of the former State of Marwar, and he ordered on 15 -3 -1934, that the two parties should get their claims determined by a civil court. In the meantime, the jagir remained under the management of the State.

(3.) THE two suits were tried together, and the trial Court held that Mohanlal was not in the line of the Murisala. It also held that Sohanlal and others were in the line of the Murisala. Therefore the suit of Mohanlal was dismissed, and the suit of Ambalal and others was decreed. There were then appeals by Mohanlal in both the suits. Both these appeals were allowed by the District Judge. He held that Ambalal and others had failed to prove that they were in the line of the original grantee, and that Mohanlal had established that he was in the line of the original grantee, and therefore entitled to the jagir.