NAND LAL Vs. ANANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this appeal relates to the property of Parabh Lal, who died of the plague on the 28 of January, 1905. He had several sons, some of whom: had died in bis life-time. The allegation of the plaintiff was that one of his sons, Har Bilas, survived him and died of plague a few days later, that Har Bilas was succeeded by his mother, Musammat Kishori, and that on the death of Musammat Kishori, which took place on the 9 of December, 1916, Nand Lal and Pararn Sukh became entitled to the property in dispute as the nearest reversionary heirs. Param Sukh has since sold his rights to Mangli who was substituted in his place during the pendency of this litigation.

(2.) The defendants, Dongar Singh and Ugar Singh, claim to be the sons of the sister of Parabh Lal. The defendants NOS. 9 to 16 have been impleaded as the remoter members of the family to which Parabh Lal belonged. The defendants Nos. 1 to 6 are transferees either from Musammat Kishori or from one or other of the claimants to the estate. The main defence urged on behalf of the defendants appellants was that Nand Lal and Param Sukh were not the nearest reversionary heirs of Parabh Lal or Har Bilas, that Har Bilas had died in the life-time of Parabh Lal and that Dongar Singh and Ugar Singh were entitled to his estate as his sister's sons. There were other pleas raised which are not material for the purpose of this appeal.

(3.) The court below found that Har Bilas had survived Parabh Lal, though that finding was expressed in terms apt to be misunderstood. It further found that the plaintiffs were the nearest reversionary heirs of Har Bilas and were entitled to his estate in preference to any of the contesting defendants.