(1.) The dispute in this appeal relates to a one-third share of the village Sewai Raghunathpur. An application was made by the defendant respondent for a partition of that share in the Revenue Court. It was opposed by the plaintiffs, who own another one-third share in the same village. Their contention was that the defendant held only a life-interest therein and was entitled to get the profits of that share for her life but was not entitled to claim a partition.
(2.) The Revenue Court directed the objectors to get the question of proprietary title determined by the Civil Court; and the present suit was consequently filed by them for a declaration that the defendant had only a life-interest in the disputed property and was not entitled to claim a partition. The court below found against them and dismissed the suit.
(3.) The entire two-thirds share belonged originally to Bisheshar Nath, the father of the defendant respondent. On the 19 of March, 1888, he executed a will, by virtue of which he devised his entire property in favour of his nephew Parmanand, with the exception of certain interests, which he had reserved in favour of his wife, Musammat Champa Kunwar, and his daughter, Musammat Mohini Kunwar, and another person named Bhaggu Lal. Musammat Champa Kunwar and Musammat Mohini Kunwar were allowed the said two-thirds share in the village Sewai Raghunathpur in equal parts with full power to realize and enjoy the profits of their respective shares in any way they liked; but they were not given any authority to make a transfer of the property bequeathed to them. On the death of Musammat Champa Kunwar, her share was to devolve on Parmanand or his sons and heirs; and on the death of Musammat Mohini Kunwar, the share given to her was to devolve on her own sons or grandsons, if any, or if she had no male issue or grandsons, on Parmanand or his sons and heirs. On the death of Bisheshar Nath, the names of Musammat Champa Kunwar and Musammat Mohini Kunwar were entered in the revenue papers. On the death of Musammat Champa Kunwar, her share devolved on Hanuman Prasad, the son of Parmanand, and is now in the possession of the plaintiffs.