TULSHI PRASAD Vs. JAGMOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal. The plaintiff is a daughter's son of one Ganga Ram who died on 5 February 1904. He left a widow, by name Mt. Mohani Kunwar who died on 1 February 1922, leaving a daughter Mt. Kausilla. Tint latter died on 12 May 1922, and the plaintiff is her son. On 20 November 1904, i.e., nine months after her husband's death Mt. Mohani Kunwar executed a sale-deed for Rs. 20,000 in respect of certain property in the village of Baghwala in equal shares in favour of Matru Mal and three brothers by name Ulfat Rai, Gulzari Lal and Mulchand. Ulfat Rai, and Gulzari Lal were sons-in-law of Ganga Ram, and Mt. Mohani Kunwar, Gukari Lal's wife was already dead, but Ulfat Rai's wife was Mt. Kausilla, mother of the plaintiff. The ostensible reason for this sale-deed was the obligation which rested upon Mt. Mohani Kunwar to pay the debts of her deceased husband and it was alleged that Ganga Ram had actually given her instructions to this effect before his death.

(2.) On 17 December 1913, Matru Mal bequeathed his half-share in this property by will to defendant 3, and the wife (now deceased) of defendant 4. In 1910, Ulfat Rai transferred his one third share of the other moiety of the property to one Murlidhar. Subsequently, Murlidhar sued the sons of Gulzari Lal and Mulchand on a. mortgage-deed and obtained a decree and thereafter on 24 March 1918, the judgment-debtors executed a sale-deed of their two-third share in the moiety of the Baghwala property to Murlidbar. Thus Murlidhar became owner of the whole property. Defendants 1 and 2 are grandsons of Murlidhar and so they represent the half-share of the Baghwala property which had been transferred to Ulfat Rai, Gulzari Lal and Mulchand, and defendants 3 and 4 represent the half-share which had gone to Matru Mal. The sale-deed, 20 November 1904, was attested by Nainsukh Das, who is a brother of Ganga Ram deceased and by Nainsukh Das's son Kanhaiya Lal and it was also attested by Mohani Kunwar's own brother Bhojraj,

(3.) The plaintiff alleged that Ganga Ram was a zamindar and money-lender and carried on an indigo business, that he died in a state of solvency, that this widow was old and of feeble intellect and that the members of the family took advantage of her position and dominated her mind and in conspiracy with each other, induced her to execute this deed of sale. The defendants denied all the allegations of the plaint and they pleaded inter alia that the sale-deed was executed by Mt. Mohani Kunwar to satisfy the debts of her deceased husband, that this amounted to a legal necessity and that the sale deed is therefore binding on the plaintiff.