JAG PRASAD RAI Vs. MUSAMMAT SINGARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a decree of the High Court at Allahabad, dated July 13, 1921, which reversed a decree of an Additional Subordinate Judge of Gorakpur, dated April 24, 1918.

(2.) The family to which the parties to the suit belonged is a Hindu family which is governed by the law of the Mitakshara. The following pedigree shows how the parties to the suit are connected with each other, but in reading the pedigree as printed, it must be read from the right of the reader to his left. Sheo Narain was the eldest son of Balkrishn Bai and of his seven younger brothers, Durga Prasad was the youngest.

(3.) The suit in which this appeal has arisen was brought by Jag Prasad and Ram Jas Rai against Musammat Singari, the widow of Gaya Prasad, who died childless, for possession, or a declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to the possession of property of which Gaya Prasad died possessed on the allegation that they and Gaya Prasad were, when he died, members of a joint Mitakshara family. 3. Bal Krishn had eight sons who are shown in the pedigree, and he with his eight sons, when they were all living, constituted a Mitakshara joint family. The family was possessed of several villages and other property. The family lived at Sonchiraiya, which was the principal ancestral village. Their lorships do not know when Bal Krishn died, but he died several years before 1892. Indarjit, who was the third son, died in 1882. Sri Ram, Ram Dhan and Durga Prasad, who were the sixth, seventh and eighth sons died before 1892. All the eight sons had married and had a son or sons who were living in 1892 In 1892 the family agreed that Sheo Narain, who was the eldest son of Bal Krishn, should partition the joint family property into eight equal shares. The intention of such a partition obviously was that there should be a separation of the family into eight families, each representing one of the eight sons of Bal Krishn and his descendant or descendants and joint within itself. In their lordships opinion the effect of that agreement was that the previous joint family separated into eight families. Thereupon Sheo Narain in 1892 partitioned the joint property into eight shares. The parties to the agreement were not satisfied that the eight shares into which Sheo Narain had partitioned the property were equal in value, and on January 3, 1895, the following persons, describing themselves as Nand Lal Rai, Chhatarpal Rai and Sheo Ratan Rai, sons of Balkrishn Rai deceased; Nageshar Prasad Rai, Rambaran Rai and Mahadeo Prasad Rai, sons of Durga Rai deceased; Brrjaj Rai and Gajraj Rai, sons of Sri Ram Raj deceased; Saminath Rai, son of Ramdhan Rai, deceased; Ram Jas Rai, son of Indarjit Rai, deceased, appointed three arbitrators to make the partition in eight equal shares of the property in Sudar Tahsil, district of Gorakpur, and other Tahsils.