BABU KAILASH CHANDRA JAIN Vs. MTJHAMOLA KUNWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have two appeals before us, one No. 343 of 1941 arising out of a suit instituted by Mt. Jhamola Kunwar to recover a sum of Rs. 22,000 from Kailash Chand on account of arrears of maintenance for the period from 1 January 19,33 to 3l July, 1937 at the rate of Rs. 400 per mensem and the other No. 342 of 1941 arising out of a suit instituted by Kailash Chand against Mt. Jhamola Kunwar in order to obtain a decree that the latter's allowance should be reduced from Rs. 400 per mensem to Rs. 200 per mensem. Mt. Jhamola Kunwar obtained her decree from the learned Civil Judge of Allahabad and Kailash Chand's suit was dismissed. Kailash Chand is the appellant in both appeals and Mt. Jhamola Kunwar is the respondent. The parties are Jains.

(2.) Mt. Jhamola Kunwar when she was a widow entered into an agreement on 14 February 1917 with Kedar Nath, the natural father of Kailash Chand, that she would adopt the latter as her son on certain conditions, namely, (1) that the deeds of gift executed by her on 20 January 1916, 25 January 1916 and 25th February 1916 in favour respectively of her elder daughters, Malti Sunder Bibi and Radhika Sunder Bibi, and in favour of the Burner Chand Digambar Jain Boarding House, Allahabad, should be binding upon her adopted son, (2) that she would be entitled to make a future gift of certain specified property to her third daughter, Manorama Sunder Bibi, gifts of cash to her three daughters and a gift by way of trust of property not exceeding one lakh of rupees for any charit, able purposes, (3) that she should receive a maintenance allowance of Rs. 500 a month from her adopted son and (4) that she should be the guardian of her son so long as he remained a minor and should continue to look after the entire management of the property including a business house, shop, money-lending, etc. On the next day, that is, on 15 February 1917 she executed a deed of adoption in approximately the same terms.

(3.) In 1919 Mt. Jhamola Kunwar was appointed to be the guardian of Kailash Chand under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act. In 1924 Kailash Chand came of age and he thereupon demanded from Mt. Jhamola Kunwar an account of her conduct of his affairs and questioned her right to make certain transfers. It may be mentioned that she had made gifts in or about the year 1922 to her three daughters, to the Jain Boarding House and to a dispensary in addition to a gift made in 1918 to her youngest daughter of the properties mentioned in the deed of adoption. On 11 January 1925, Kailash Chand, Mt. Jhamola Kunwar and Mt. Jhamola Kunwar's three daughters came to terms and executed a deed of compromise. The terms were that Kailash Chand would not question the gifts made in 1916 and 1918 and the gifts made by way of charity but that the daughters would reconvey certain villages transferred to them in 1922 on payment by Kailash Chand of a sum of as. 50,000 to each of them and that the maintenance allowance payable to Mt. Jhamola Kunwar should be reduced from Rs. 500 a month to Rs. 400 a month. There were other subsidiary arrangements which it is unnecessary to set forth. Before this deed of compromise could be registered one of the daughters, Mt. Radhika Sunder Bibi, died in August 1925. We are told that there was a further compromise between her husband, Banwari Lal, and Kailash Chand in November 1925, but the disputes seem to have been revived because Kailash Chand instituted two suits in 1927 against the two daughters and against the dispensary. The result was a further compromise evidenced by a deed executed on 26 April 1927. The parties to this were Kailash Chand, Mt. Jhamola Kunwar, the two surviving daughters and the sons of the two daughters. This was in very much the same terms as the previous settlement of 1925. The daughters gave up certain property in consideration of cash payments. There were arrangements about certain cash transactions and in so far as Mt. Jhamola Kunwar was concerned Kailash Chand promised to pay her Rs. 400 a month on account of maintenance allowance and to place a house in Allahabad at her disposal. On the same date Kailash Chand executed a separate agreement to pay a monthly sum of Rs. 400 to Mt. Jhamola Kunwar during her lifetime. This allowance was made a charge upon the pro. perty in his possession. The agreements of 26 April 1927 are the basis of Mt. Jhamola Kunwar's suit and the occasion of Kailash Chand s. The main dispute between the parties was whether the rate of the allowance could be varied. The learned Civil Judge held that it could not. Learned Counsel for the appellant has quoted a number of rulings and has argued that an allowance in lieu of maintenance to be paid to a Hindu woman is always liable to be varied, but I am of opinion that the decision of the learned Judge of the Court below is right.