CHAJJU Vs. UMRAO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In 1870 one Sheo Singh died leaving a widow, Muaammat Golab and two grandsons, by a deceased daughter, named Ganga and Jamna. In 1875 his widow died. It was alleged that Sheo Singh at the time of his death was possessed of a portion of a house in which he, and after him his widow, resided.

(2.) In 1877 his nephews, the sons of a deceased brother, instituted a suit in which they alleged that they had been joint with Sheo Singh and claimed to eject Chajju, the appellant before us, from the portion of the house said to have been Sheo Singh s. Chajju was the brother of Musammat Golab, and the plaintiffs in that suit, while admitting that he was in possession, averred that he had merely been allowed out of grace by Sheo Singh and Musammat Golab to live in the house.

(3.) Chajju, in his written statement, in the first place, pleaded that the plaintiffs had no right to sue, as the two grandsons, and not the plaintiffs, were the heirs of Sheo Singh. He further pleaded that the property in suit was his ancestral property, and that it had been in the possession of himself and his predecessors in title for upwards of a hundred years.