HAYES Vs. HARENDRA NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the defendants, who are the executors of one Dharam Chand Lal against the decree of the District Judge of Purneah, by which the decree of the Subordinate Judge was reversed and the suit of the plaintiff decreed.

(2.) The suit was instituted on the 11 of July 1899 by the heirs of one Prohlad Singh, for the purpose of setting aside a putni lease granted to Dharam Chand Lal by a lady named Mussummut Sibbati, who held a proprietary interest in the lands in suit for a widow's estate and upon whose estate Prohlad Singh was the reversioner at law. The suit proceeded apparently as far as the filing of the written statement, on the 14 of August 1899, but from that time until the 26 of February 1900, nothing appears to have been done. On that date, however, the executor of Prohlad Singh, Prohlad Singh having died on the 11 of November 1898, leaving a will bearing date the 9 of November in the same year, was substituted for the original plaintiffs as the legal representative of Prohlad Singh. The case then proceeded in the ordinary course, and was disposed of in the manner I have mentioned. The decree of the Subordinate Judge is dated the 17 of July 1900 and that of the learned Judge the 29 of May 1901.

(3.) It has been found that the lessor of Dharam Chand Lal, Mussummut Sibbati, granted the putni in question without legal necessity, and the question, upon which the case turns, is whether her reversioner Prohlad Singh did or did not give his assent to the lease. The finding upon this point of the learned Judge is that he did not give his assent, and, in that view of the case it was that he declined to uphold the lease and set it aside.