DWARKA PRASAD SINGH Vs. JANKI PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two consolidated appeals from a judgment and decree of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner of Oudh, dated the 8th of September, 1909, and arise out of a suit brought by the plaintiff Dwarka Prasad in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bara Banki, for partition of certain properties known as taluqa Ranimau, in which he claimed a share as a member of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara Law.

(2.) THE two defendants to this action were the plaintiff's elder brother Janki Prasad and their mother Marjad Kuar, and as the mother, under the Mitakshara Law, is entitled on the partition of ancestral property to an equal share with the sons for her life, the plaintiff asked for a decree in respect of a third share in the entire property included in the list attached to the plaint.

(3.) A short history of the family will explain the reasons on which the Courts in India have proceeded in arriving at their conclusions. The nucleus of the taluqa in dispute is said to have been formed by one Suk Shah. He owned nine villages, but the number increased to sixteen in the hands of his son and successor, Sakat Singh, who lived about the close of the 18th century. In 1856, when the British first occupied the kingdom of Oudh, the taluqa included 21 villages, and was held by Autar Singh, eighth in descent from Gulal Shah, the original ancestor of the parties and the grand father of Suk Shah, On the outbreak of the Mutiny Autar is said to have disappeared. Nor did he make his appearance on Lord Canning's famous Proclamation issued in March, 1858. The British authorities accordingly proceeded to make a settlement of his confiscated villages with third parties. But some time in July, 1859, Autar appeared before the authorities, explained the reason of his non-appearance before, and applied for a settlement of his villages. They were apparently satisfied with his explanation, and on the 5th of October, 1859, an order was passed on his application, sanctioning the summary settlement with him of the remaining nine villages which had not been finally settled with others. The Kabuliat, however, was not signed by him until the 13th of that month.