It is to meet these expenses that Laung Kuer raised Rs.
126 of 1943 was amended by adding reliefs for possession and mesne profits.
against the judgment of the High Court of Patna in Second Appeals Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMA AIYAR, J. These are appeal.
200 for repairing a well, which had been companystructed by the deceased for user by the public and which was then in a ruined companydition.
69 of 1944 for redemption.
1,600 Out of this amount, a sum of Rs.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated August 1956, of the Patna High Court, in Second Appeals Nos.
And both the suits were tried together.
2155 and 2156 of 1948 on certificates granted by the High Court under Art.
2155 and 2156 of 1948 in the High Court of Patna.
It is recited in the deed of sale that a sum of Rs.
69 of 1944 filed by the appellant.
133 1 c of the Constitution.
The appeals were then heard by a Bench companysisting of Rai and Misra, JJ.,
K. Garg, M. K. Ramamurthi, S. C. Agarwal, and D. P. Singh, for respondents Nos.
126 of 1943 filed by the respondents and granted a decree for redemption in Title Suit No.
1,100.
V. Viswanatha Sastri and R. C. Prasad, for the appellant.
Meantime the reversioners, the respondents herein, had filed Title Suit No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Against these decrees, the respondents preferred Second Appeals Nos.
100 was required to effect repairs to the family dwelling house, a sum of Rs.
It is number in dispute that this deed is binding on the reversioners.
The parties were at issue on several questions of fact of which the only one material at this stage is whether the sale in favour of the appellant was supported by necessity and binding on the reversioners.
One Prithi Dubey died on July 14, 1932, leaving him surviving, his widow Laung Kuer, who succeeded as heir to his estate.
500 was paid in cash.
April 28.
For the purpose of discharging debts due by the deceased Laung Kuer executed on June 21, 1935, a Zerpeshgi deed in favour of two persons, Rajdewan Dubey and Kailash Dabey, who were also the next reversioners, for a sum of Rs.
The facts leading to this litigation lie in a narrow companypass.
On June 17, 1943, Laung Kuer sold to the appellant a portion of the properties which were the subject matter of the Zerpeshgi deed dated June 21, 1935, for a companysideration of Rs.
The respondents herein, the reversioners, preferred appeals against both the decrees passed by the District Munsif of Palamau and they were heard by the Subordinate Judge of Palamau, who, agreeing with the findings given by the District Munsif, affirmed the decrees and dismissed the appeals.
645 and 646 of 1957.
After obtaining the sale deed, the appellant sought to redeem the Zerpeshgi, but the Zerpeshgidars refused to receive the amount and surrender possession of the properties.
2155 and 2156 of 1948.
200 for purchasing two bulls for agricultural purposes, and a sum of Rs.
1 to 4.
The appellant deposited the mortgage amount in companyrt under s. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act and then instituted Title Suit No.
126 of 1943 for a declaration that the sale deed in favour the appellant was number binding on the reversioners.
While these appeals were pending, Laung Kuer died on March 14, 1952, and on the application of the respondents, the plaint in Title Suit No.
1,100 was reserved with the purchaser for redemption of the Zerpeshgi, and the balance of Rs.
