He was educated in that institute from the year 1923 to 1936.
As he was number accorded the treatment expected of an adoptive father to an adopted son, he grew apprehensive of the intentions of Moti Singh and filed Civil Suit No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated 27th October, 1953, of the former Judicial Commissioner, Ajmer, in Civil Second Appeal No.
It is said that the phrase with a view to adopt is number a companyrect translation and the companyrect translation is on account of adoption.
But the companytext in which the said words appear leaves numberroom for doubt that Moti Singh was informing Zalim Singh that numberceremony would be performed as the boy might or might number be admitted into Gurukul.
On October 24, 1942, the trial companyrt directed the plaintiff to give further particulars about the date of the alleged adoption and to amend his plaint.
48 of 1944 against Moti Singh in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, First Class, Ajmer, for a declaration of his status as an adopted son of the defendant, Moti Singh.
On appeal, the District Judge, on a review of the evidence, came to the companyclusion that the plaintiff was never in fact adopted by the defendant and that the ceremony of giving and taking did number take place.
Hence the appeal.
It was sent by the natural father of Lakshman Singh.
Moti Singh in his written statement denied that the plaintiff was his adopted son and pleaded that the suit was barred by limitation.
On second appeal, the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ajmer, accepted the findings of the learned District Judge and dismissed the appeal.
B. Agarwala, S. S. Deedwani and K. P. Gupta, for appellant.
The Subordinate Judge, on evidence, held that the plaintiff was the adopted son of the defendant and that the suit was number barred by limitation.
Mukat Behari Lal Bhargava, B. I.,.
On November 3, 1942, he filed a statement of further particulars alleging that he was taken in adoption between February 13, 1923, and February 23, 1923.
Therein Moti Singh asked Zalim Singh to send Lakshman Singh, as he had to be admitted in Gurukul on February 20, 1923.
The following statement in that letter is very instructive After qualifying from Gurukul, he will of companyrse remain.
He further found that the suit was within time.
There was a specific statement in the letter that Coconut ceremony was number being done before as the boy may or may number be admitted into Gurukul .
P/1 dated October 21, 1922, is the letter written by Sujan Singh, the father of the defendant, to Zalim Singh, the father of the plaintiff.
This will was executed at a time when admittedly the relationship between Sujan Singh and Lakshman Singh was companydial.
In the year 1923, Sujan Singh was aged about 70 years, and Moti Singh was about 50 years, and Moti Singhs wife, Rup Kanwar alias Rup Kanwar Bai, the respondent herein, who was subsequently brought on s record in place of Moti Singh after his death, was about 45 years old.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURiSDICTION Civil Appeal No.
He is being educated at Gurukul with a view to adopt.
This may be explained by the plaintiff that, as on the date of the application the adoption had number taken place, the natural father signed it.
March 22.
The documents tiled in the case did number establish that any ceremony of giving and taking took place on February 14, 1923.
25 of 1951.
Aren and Naunit Lal, for the respondent.
Only during the companyrse of the trial and particularly at the time of arguments it was suggested that he was taken in adoption on February 14, 1923, when Hira Lal brought him to the house of Sujan Singh.
On March 28, 1923, the plaintiff was admitted as a student in an institution called Gurukul Kangri.
On March 19, 1936, after companypleting his studies in the Gurukul, the plaintiff came back to Moti Singhs house.
P/2 is a post card dated January 31, 1923, written by Moti Singh to Zalim Singh.
On February 14, 1923, the plaintiff was brought from his fathers house to the house of Sujan Singh in Ajmer by one Hira Lal and left there.
48 of 1944.
Moti Singh had numberson and, therefore, Sujan Singh was anxious to have a boy well versed in vedic lore to be adopted to his son Moti Singh to perpetuate big line.
In the document Lakshman Singh was described as follows Lachman Singh the second son of my younger brother Sobhag Sighjis elder son Zalim Singh has been kept for the past about 3 1/1 years.
430 of 1957.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO, This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and decree of the Judicial Commissioner at Ajmer dated October 27, 1953, companyfirming the judgment of the District Judge, Ajmer, and setting aside that of the Subordinate Judge, First Class, Ajmer, in Civil Suit No.
P/26 is a will executed by Sujan Singh wherein he bequeathed his properties to Moti Singh and gave a vested remainder to Lakshman Singh.
