(1.) This and the connected appeal No. 178 of 1921 arise out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff respondent for possession of immovable as well as movable properties of various descriptions. The bulk of this property is alleged to have belonged to one Abid Husain, who died in the year 1909. He left surviving him his widow, Musammat Amrit Bibi, the first defendant, a grand-daughter Musammat Umme Habiba (the daughter of a deceased daughter) and three grandsons of one of his sisters. These grandsons are the defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4.
(2.) Abid Husain is said to have made a will in the year 1907 when he was going to Karbala. Musammat Umme Habiba died in 1919. The plaintiff is her husband and he claims a share in the property which according to him passed to Umme Habiba. If Abid Husain did not make a will, 14 annas of his property would go under the Shia Law, to which sect he belonged, to Musammat Umme Habiba and 2 annas to Musammat Amrit Bibi. Accordingly it is stated that Musammat Umme Habiba inherited 14 annas of the property, and the plaintiff as her husband is entitled to half of the aforesaid 14 annas, that is, to 7 annas out of 16 annas. The plaintiff denies the alleged will, and he also claims a declaration that the will was never made, and that if it was made, it was invalid and could not have any operation under the Muhammadan Law.
(3.) The property claimed was of five descriptions. There was some zamindari property which is specified in schedule A annexed to the plaint. There was some house property mentioned in schedule B. Schedule C specifies certain deposits in the Allahabad Bank and also in the Post Office Savings Bank. In schedule D are specified certain jewellery and other movable property which is alleged to have belonged to Umme Habiba. And schedule B is property which the plaintiff alleges belonged to him, being cricket gear and articles of a similar nature. Out of the property mentioned in schedule D the plaintiff claims an 8 anna share.