MIRAN Vs. HANSLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE five appellants are the four sons of Chhatarsingh and one is the son of Amansingh: Chhatarsingh and Amansing are Gond brothers who executed a mortgage of a three anna share in the village on 1st October 1915. The trial Court has found that there was legal necessity or antecedent debt to the extent of Rs. 73-6 only: Rs. 2,000 out of the consideration were taken, not under legal necessity, in order to purchase a four anna share of the property which was mortgaged. The learned Judge, however, has held that the defendants are not governed by Hindu Law and that the property at the time of the mortgage belonged to the executants alone. A preliminary decree has been passed for foreclosure of the eight annas share for the amount due on the mortgage.

(2.) IN the first three grounds of appeal it is urged that defendants have proved that they were by custom governed by Hindu Law and that therefore the minor sons had a vested interest in the mortgaged property at the time of the mortgage The plea on this point was: The family is governed in all respects by the Hindu Law originally or at any rate by the reason of its having bean adopted by the community to which it belongs.

(3.) IT has never been found that there is any definite body of law which governs large body of Gonds in different parts of the Province. It is therefore not unlikely that a family of Gonds or a large body of Gonds should adopt the principles of Hindu Law when they had no well defined and well known law of then own Credible evidence that on the points, which most frequently anse, involving personal law, custom of the family or body differs in no respect from that of Hindu families in the locality, would in my opinion suffice for an inference that all the principles of Hindu Law might have been adopted It would then be for the opposite party to show that although part of the Hindu Law might have been adopted, the particular custom which governed the disposal of the suit had not been adopted It is clear that there is no authority on Gond Law, no direct evidence can be produced regarding a principle which was of rare application Uneducated Hindu villagers cannot be expected to state what is Hindu Law except with regard to points which anse frequently, and uneducated Gond witnesses must similarly be unable to state the law which governs them on such points.