MUSAMMAT GOWRI Vs. GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE think that this is a suit which ought never to have been brought. The plaintiffs right to the property would only arise after the death of the original defendant, Musammat Badamo (who has, as a matter of fact, died during the progress of the litigation) and her daughter, Musammat Gouri, and all the sons of Musammat Gouri of whom there are apparently four living. In the event of any one of these sons having male issue the plaintiffs right would probably never arise at all. The deed of gift complained of was not made to a stranger but was made to Musammat Gouri, and in reality amounted to no more than a relinquishment by Musammat Badamo of her life-interest in respect of this part of the property of her deceased husband. It seems to us that the suit can have been brought for no other purpose than to harass and put the defendants to unnecessary expense. WE accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the decree of the Court below and dismiss the plaintiffs suit with costs in all Courts including in this Court fees on the higher scale.