(1.) The following fasts are admitted. Dawan and Budhan Singh were brothers. Dawan died leaving him surviving a widow, Musammat Kbaira, and two daughters, the Musammats Kalwanta and Maktola. On his death his widow's name was recorded against half the property that bad originally belonged to Ranjit Singh, the father of the above mentioned brothers. Bud ban had two wiver, Musammats Palti and Samarkba, and by the letter a daughter Musammat Jagta who was the mother of Raj Kumar Singh plaintiff No. 1, and two other sons who are now dead, who were also plaintiffs.
(2.) The plaintiffs (who are all minors) brought this suit on the allegation that the two brothers, Dawan and Budhan, were joint, and that on the death of Dawan, Budhan succeeded to the whole property by right of survivorship, and that Musammat Khaira's (Dawan's window s) name was recorded against half only for her consolation. After her death, and Budhan a death, the names of his widows were recorded against the entire family property. On their death Musammat Jagta Kuar succeeded to a daughter's estate and the name of the plaintiff was recorded against the whole property. Then Musammats Kalwanta and Mykola brought a suit against Musammat Jagta, claiming the property, and on the 20 June 1911 " deceived her, and caused her to file a compromise" by which she admitted their right to half the property, which is now the subject of dispute. The suit was decreed according to the compromise and their names were recorded against half On 10 September 1912 these ladies executed a mortgage, which was " fictitious and without consideration," in the name of Narain Singh. The relief claimed in this suit was a declaration that on the death of Jagta, plaintiffs are owners of the property in dispute, and prayed that the mortgage be "cancelled" as against the plaintiffs.
(3.) They made Musammat Kalwanta (Maktola being dead) defendant first party, Musammat Jagta, defendant second party, and Narain Singh and his sons, defendants third party.