JAGANNATH Vs. KANHIA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This litigation is concerned with a share of the properly of one Sham Lal, deceased. He was the grandson of one Gumani Lal. Gumani had three sons, namely Munna Lal, Ajudhia Pershad and Badri rTath. Munna Lal had two sons, namely Gopal and Sheo Parshad. The present defendants-appellants are Jagan Nath and Balanand, the sons of Gopal. Sheo Parshad had. one son, namely, Kauleshar Parshad. Sham Lal died many years ago prior to the year 1860, leaving his widow Musammat Naraini him surviving. After his death disputes arose amongst the members of the family as to the division of his property, and Gopal instituted a suit in which he impleaded as defendants Musammat Naraini and the three sons of Badri Nath, namely Ganesh Parshad, Maheshar Parshad and Beni Parshad. In that suit Gopal claimed to be entitled to the entire property of Sham Lai, alleging that Badri Nath was a separated Hindu and not a member of the joint family, and that he and Sham Lal were joint. Cranesh Parshad, Maheshar Parshad and Beni Parshad, the sons of Badri Nath, on the contrary, contended that Badri Nath was joint with Sham Lal and Gopal, and he being joint they were entitled to a share in the property. Musammat Naraini claimed that her husband was separate and that she was, therefore, entitled to a widow's life estate in all his property. The dispute between the parties was referred to arbitration and an award was made on the 2 July, 1860. By this award, a half share of the property of Sham Lal was given to Gopal and his nephew Kauleshar Parshad, a fourth shard was given to the sons of Badri Kath, and as to the remaining fourth the award provided that Naraini should have the possession and enjoyment of it during her life, and that after her death that share should be divided equally between Gopal and Kauleshar on the one side and the sons of Badri Nath on the other. A decree was passed in the terms of the award on the 9 of July, 1830, that is nearly 50 years ago.

(2.) Musammat Naraini entered into possession and enjoyment of the one-fourth share in the property so awarded to her for life and continned in possession up to her death, which occurred about three years ago.

(3.) The suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, was instituted by the grandsons and great-grandsons of Maheshar Prasad, who alone of the three sons of Badri Nath had children, Ganesh Parshad and Beni Parshad having died childless. They claim to be entitled to one-half of the one-fourth share which was given to Musammat Naraini, that is to one-eighth of the property of Sham Lal. The defendants-appellants resisted the claim alleging that they were no parties to, and were not bound by, the award and decree to which we have referred and that being the nearest reversionary heirs to Sham Lal living at the date of the death, of Musammat Naraini, they are entitled to the entire of the one-fourth share given to her by the award for her life.