HARPAL SINGH Vs. INDAR SEN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit out of which this appeal has arisen relates to fifteen villages appertaining to the Singraman estate situated in the district of Jaunpur, which is admittedly an impartible estate held by a single person, who succeeds to it according to the rule of primogeniture. Before the estate came to the plaintiff to this suit it was held by Rai Randhir Singh, who died in 1895, leaving his widow, Thakurain Sonao Kunwar, in whose favour he had made a will before his death. His nephew, Sheopal Singh, who was his nearest male relative at the time of his death, brought a suit against Sonao Kunwar for possession of the estate. The suit was compromised, and a decree was passed in accordance with the compromise. Sheopal Singh died on the 27th of July, 1899, and Thakurain Sonao Kunwar, who survived him, died on the 20th of June, 1904. Thereupon Thakurain Lekhraj Kunwar, the widow of Sheopal Singh, brought a suit against the present plaintiff, Thakur Harpal Singh, and others for possession of the estate. She obtained a decree from the court of first instance on the 24th of February, 1906, but that decree was set aside by this Court on the 29th of May, 1908. The judgment of this Court is reported in I.L.R., 30 All., 407. An appeal from the decree of this Court is, we understand, now pending in the Privy Council.

(2.) One Dilraj Kunwar obtained a money decree against Sheopal Singh on the 6th of January, 1897, and she made in fructuous attempts to execute it. After the death of Sheopal Singh her legal representatives (she being dead) made an application for execution of the decree on the 4th of September, 1906, against Thakurani Lekhraj Kunwar, his widow, and on the 24th of March, 1907, caused the fifteen villages now in dispute to be attached. As the property was ancestral, the decree was transferred to the Collector for execution. That officer granted a lease of it to the defendant appellant on the 14th of March, 1908, for a term of four years. Meanwhile, Thakur Harpal Singh obtained his decree from this Court on the 29th of May, 1908, as stated above, but in spite of his protests the Collector delivered possession of the fifteen villages to the defendant lessee on the 3rd of September, 1908. Thereupon the suit out of which this appeal has arisen, was instituted by the plaintiff, Thakur Harpal Singh, for a declaration of his right to the fifteen villages and for possession of those villages by avoidance of the lease granted to the defendant.

(3.) The plaintiff asserts that as the estate is impartible, it must be deemed to be joint family property, although it was to be held for the time being by one of the members of the family ; that although in the previous litigation it was held that it vested in Sheopal Singh, he had no absolute interest in it; that upon his death it passed to the plaintiff by right of survivorship, and that it is not liable to attachment in execution of a decree obtained against him in his personal capacity. The plaintiff also urges that as he was not made a party to the proceedings relating to the execution of the said decree, the lease granted to the defendant is not binding on him.