JADO SINGH Vs. NATTHU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs arising out of a suit brought by three minor sons to challenge an alienation made by their fathers. The eldest plaintiff was about six months old at the time of the alienation, which was on the 16 of October 1912, and the other minors were not born at all.

(2.) The allegations in the plaint were that the fathers of the plaintiffs, who were impleaded in the suit as pro forma Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, fell into the hands of avaricious parsons and became fond of speculation and gambling and were addicted to vicious habits, and in consequence they transferred ancestral property under a sale-deed of the date mentioned above in favour of the ancestors of the principal defendants without any legal necessity. There was no clear and categorical statement in the plaint that consideration had not passed, but the main allegations were that the transfer was without legal necessity and that it was tainted with immorality and illegality, and had further been brought about by the fraud of the vendees. These allegations in the plaint were denied by the principal defendants. The plaintiffs fathers who are still alive and who have special means of knowledge, were not put into the witness-box to state either that they had not received any part of the sale consideration or to depose that they had raised this money for any unlawful purpose. Both oral and documentary evidence was led on both sides.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge came to the conclusion that the transaction was for necessity and for the benefit of the family and has resulted in considerable benefit to it. He further found that the whole of the consideration had been paid. On these findings he has dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs challenge some of the findings in appeal.