MT RAMJHARI KUER Vs. SHEONARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit out of which these appeals arise was instituted by Mt. Ramjhari Kuer as daughter and heir of the late Mt. Uma Kuer in order to set aside several alienations made by or on behalf of Mt. Uma Kuer while she was in possession of the widow's estate. The plaintiff has Joined in one suit alienations made to different persons; but she ought to have been required at the outset to sever her different causes of action. One result of the joinder has been that the unsuccessful defendants have been treated as jointly and severally liable for a larger amount of costs than would ordinarily be justified by the value of their interest, while the litigation has been unduly prolonged owing to the necessity from time to time of substitution, as one or other among the unwieldy mass of defendants died. The suit was in part decreed and in part dismissed by the Subordinate Judge.

(2.) The plaintiff has appealed from that portion of his decision which is in favour of Sheonarain Singh and other defendants, while two sets of defendants have appealed from so much of the decision as sets aside the alienations made to them. (After dealing with the Appeals Nos. 108 and 174, his Lordship proceeded). I now come to Appeal No. 111. In 1908, Mt. Uma Kuer fell into arrears in payment of public cesses, which resulted in the issue of certificates and the sale of a portion of the estate under the Public Demands Recovery Act. The plaintiff sued for recovery of this property and her prayer has been allowed by the Subordinate Judge on the ground that nothing beyond the right, title and interest of Mt. Uma Kuer passed by the sale which must be interpreted as meaning that the purchaser acquired nothing more than Mt. Uma Kuer's life interest in the property.

(3.) Mr. S.N. Roy, on behalf of the appellants, who have purchased this property from the original auction-purchaser, argues that the sale, treated as a sale of the reversion, has been ratified by the plaintiff; and that in any event the sale for arrears of public ceases should be regarded as a sale of the property in respect of which the arrears were due, so that the whole interest, the life estate and the reversion should be held to have passed by it. There was litigation over this Court sale which began in the time of Mt. Uma Kuer and concluded after her death. Harnarain, the purchaser of the property with which we were concerned in Appeal No. 174, found, after he had acquired a one anna share from the lady, that she had mortgaged a two annas share which included the property conveyed to him; and he was faced with the necessity of losing his property or paying off the mortgage.