RAM KRISHNA PRODHAN Vs. SMKOUSALYA MANI DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by defendant 1 and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs who are the daughters of Bhagabat to whom the properties in suit belonged, for declaration of title to the half-share of the plaint properties, to a decree for recovery of possession after such declaration for partition of the properties by metes and bounds and for costs. The suit has been partially decreed by the Subordinate Judge and a preliminary decree for partition has been passed. Hence the appeal by defendant 1. A genealogical table has been appended to the plaint (see p. 8, part I of the paper-book) and shows the relationship between the parties to the suit:

(2.) It is necessary to state a few salient facts, in order to understand the question of law which falls for determination in this appeal. They are these: On 8 July 1920 a deed of adoption was executed by Bhagabat Prodhan in favour of defendant 1 and three days later Bhagabat died. On 13 August 1920 the deed of adoption was presented for registration. Defendants 4 and 5, the two surviving widows of Bhagabat viz., Rupa Bewa and Annada Bewa, put in objections to the registration of the deed Sital Prosad, son of Bhagabat, predeceased his father. Defendant 5, the youngest widow of Bhagabat, started proceedings under Section 107, Criminal P.C. An inquiry was held on 11 September 1920. There was village arbitration with the result that four documents were executed: (1) one Nadabi deed was executed by Rupa Bewa, defendants, in favour of defendant-appellant on "29 September 1920, Ex. E, p. 1. By this document on receipt of Rs. 560 for maintenance, pilgrimage etc., she gave up her rights to the inheritance. On the same day she also executed a deed of relinquishment, Ex. E, p. 4 (part. II). By this document she received 5 bighas 19 cottahs as life tenant and 3 bighas absolutely. The third and fourth documents were executed by defendant 1 confirming the grant of these properties. They are Ex. F, p. 7, Part II and Ex. J, p. 9, Part II, and are both dated 2 October, 1920.

(3.) By these two documents defendant 1 conveyed 5 bighas 19 cottahs, etc., of mourasi mokarrari Jal lands to defendant 5, Ananda Bewa, for life and 3 bighas of lands absolutely to the said defendant respectively, and the proceedings under Section 107, Criminal P.C. terminated. The younger widow wanted to reopen these transactions, and on 23 December 1920 defendant 5 instituted a suit for a declaration that defendant 1's adoption was invalid and for a further declaration that the Nadabi deed was an invalid and fraudulent document. The suit was numbered as Title Suit No. 140 of 1920. On 9 January 1922 the suit was dismissed for default. In this suit the co-widow was joined as a party. On 30 January 1923 defendant 5 disposed of the properties obtained by her from defendant 1 by two separate kobalas one in favour of Niranjan Bera (Ex. A) and the other in favour of defendant 1 (Ex. A, p. 17, Part II). She sold 5 bighas 19 cottahs to defendant 1 for Rs. 500, and out of this sum of Rs. 500, Rs. 200 was applied in liquidation of her costs in Title Suit No. 140 of 1920 and the balance was paid in cash. We will have to advert to this document (Ex. A-l) again when considering one of the questions of law which falls for determination in this appeal.