HAIDAR ALI Vs. TASSADUK RASUL KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Plaintiff and Appellant Haidar Ali is the elder brother of Rajah Farzand Ali Khan, talookdar of Jehangirabad, who died without leaving any male issue. He held a sanad for the estate of Jehangirahad, and his name was entered in list No. 2, prepared according to Act I. of 1869. He left four kinds of property: 1. The talookdari estate conferred by the Sanad.

(2.) LANDED property acquired by him from other talookdars.

(3.) MOVEABLE property, money, and debts. 2. The Plaintiff Haidar Ali claimed to be the Rajah's sole heir and successor, and entitled to the first and second classes of property, and to so much of the fourth as might be held to be heirlooms under the provisions of Sections 14 and 22 of Act I. of 1869, and to a fourth share, according to the Mahomedan law, of the third class of property and of the fourth, exclusive of heirlooms. The other Plaintiff and Appellant is a purchaser of part of Haidar All's interest. The Defendants, the Respondents, were in possession, and had obtained mutation of names in their favour in the Revenue Department. Their grounds of defence will be conveniently noticed as the case with regard to each class of property is considered. 3. As to the first class, the defence of Tassaduk, who was in possession of it, was founded on a document, dated the 6th of April, 1860, and a formal will of the Rajah, dated the 19th of August, 1879. The first of these is a statement by Rajah Farzand Ali in reply to inquiries by the Government under Circular Orders regarding the succession of talookdars. It is as follows: I am Rajah Farzand Ali Khan Bahadur, talookdar of Jehangirabad, &c. Whereas the Government has been pleased to confer upon me the proprietary rights in this estate, to be enjoyed from generation to generation, I do hereby request that after my death my estate may be maintained intact and without partition according to Raj Gaddi custom, and that, owing to my not having a male issue, Zebunnissa, who is my daughter by Rani Abbas Bandi, daughter of Rajah Razzak Baksh, shall be considered entitled to succession and inheritance. But as I have taken Tassaduk Rasul from my brother Mardan Ali Khan, and have commenced to bring him up and educate him as my son, if he finishes his education during my lifetime and is married to Zebunnissa, he shall after me succeed to my estate as my adopted son. 4. The Rajah made other replies about the same, the talook being in three districts, in which no reference was made to his daughter or Tassaduk Rasul, and it was contended that the reply of the 6th of April was not intended more than the others to be testamentary; but in a letter from the Rajah to the Deputy-Commissioner, dated the 20th of June, 1877, in reply to questions that had been asked, he said in reply to the fourth question, which was to give the name and title of any boy who might be his successor, whether his begotten or adopted son, "The reply to this question refers to the will which has been submitted to the Lucknow district through the tahsil of Kursi on the 6th of April, 1860." This shows that he intended that to be his will. Their Lordships are of opinion, following the judgment of this Board in Hurpurshad v. Sheo Dyal Law Rep. 3 Ind. Ap. 259, that it is a will within the definition in Section 2 of Act I. of 1869. It is therefore a complete answer to the Plaintiff's claim to Jehangirabad.