MT KAULU Vs. TOLU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen out of a suit instituted by Mt. Kaulu for possession of land measuring 30 kanals and 9 marlas situate in village Tappa. Jalari on the allegations that Mt. Makori, mother of the plaintiff, was not competent to make a gift of the land in suit in favour of Tolu Ram defendant. The plaintiff pleaded that the suit land was in possession of Mt. Makori as the estate of her husband. The land was described in the plaint as the self-acquired property of Mt. Makori's husband and the plaintiff claimed that she being the daughter of Nidhu, husband of Mt. Makori, was entitled to the possession of the suit land.

(2.) Tolu Ram defendant denied that Mt. Makori was the widow of Nidhu or that the plaintiff was a daughter of Nidhu. He pleaded that Mt. Kaulu had no locus standi to challenge the gift in question and in case the plaintiff was found to be the daughter of Nidhu, she had no right to succeed to the land in suit as the defendant was a collateral of the deceased and the land in suit was ancestral qua his and the gift made by Mt. Makori in favour of the defendant was made for services rendered. The case was fought on the following issues: 1. Is defendant 1 not the widow of Nidhu? 2. Is plaintiff the daughter of Nidhu deceased? 3. Was the gift in favour of Tolu Ram defendant 2 validly made? 4. Is the land in suit ancestral qua defendant 2 Tolu Ram? 5. Is defendant 2 a collateral of Nidhu deceased? If so, of what degree? 6. Is there any other legal representative of Mt. Makori besides the plaintiff? If so, what is the effect of their not being brought on the record? The trial Court found that Mt. Makori was the widow of Nidhu and that Mt. Kaulu plaintiff was the daughter of Nidhu and Mt. Makori. The trial Court further found that the gift made by Mt. Makori in favour of Tolu Ram was not a valid gift and that the land in suit was not ancestral qua Tolu Ram. On issue No. 5 the Court found Tolu Ram to be a collateral of Nidhu. The trial Court held that it was not proved that there were any other legal representatives of Mt. Makori deceased besides the plaintiff.

(3.) On the findings set out above, the trial Court decreed the suit of Mt. Kaulu plaintiff with costs against the defendant.