(1.) Second Appeals Nos. 1792, 1793, 1794 and 1795 are defendants appeals and are connected with each other. On 3 April 1925, a sale deed of five annas four pies share in two mahals of mauza Lohradih was executed by Jagpat Singh in favour of Dallu Singh was Rs. 1,000. On the same date a perpetual lease was executed by the same person in favour of Sukhdeo Singh, who was a nephew of the vendee. This lease related to sir lands and was in lieu of a premium of Rs. 3,000 fixing an annual rent of Rs. 90, By a subsequent compromise, dated 14th October 1925, in a suit brought by the transferrer to set aside these two transfers it was ultimately agreed to return the share in one mahal to the transferrer, the transferee retaining the share in mahal Katwaru only. It is this share which is in dispute in these appeals.
(2.) The present plaintiffs instituted a suit (out of which S.A. No. 1792 arises) to pre-empt both the sale and the perpetual lease of the shares in mahal Katwaru, alleging that the two were part and parcel of one transaction and constituted a single transaction of sale. They also alleged that the subsequent compromise was a fraudulent device and was a mere paper transaction.
(3.) In order to meet the claim the defendants obtained a deed of gift of a share in mahal Katwaru from one Baij Nath on 19 April 1926, while the pre-emption suit was pending, and the claim was resisted on the strength of this deed of gift. Second appeal No. 1793 arises out of this suit to avoid the deed of gift.