The trial companyrt held that Munshi Ram was entitled to succeed to the property left.
by, Nanak Chand along with Salig Ram and decreed the suit accordingly Salig Ram went in appeal to the District Judge but failed.
His case was that Munshi Ram was number entitled either according to personal law or the riwaj i am of Amritsar district to any share in the property left by Nanak Chand.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated July 5, 1954.
The suit was resisted by Salig Ram defendant appellant who is the other son of Nanak Chand.
of the Punjab High Court in L. P. A. No.
March 21.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
461 of 1957.
The following pedigreetable will be useful in understanding the claim put forward by the respondent Heman Karori Laghi Maghi Jai Dayal issueless Gobind Ata Nanak Chand Santu Munshi Ram adopted son plaintiff Hans Raj Salig Kam Defdt.
The case of Munshi Ram was that he was entitled to one half share of the property left by Nanak Chand as his their, according to Zamindara custom.
MunshiRam adopted by Ata The claim of Munshi Ram was with respect to the property left by Nanak Chand who is his natural grandfather and also Santu.
He then went in second appeal to the High Court but the second appeal was also dismissed The High Court having refused to grant a certificate the appellant applied to this Court for special leave which was granted and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
There is numberdispute number about the property of Santu and we are companycerned in this appeal only with the property of Nanak Chand.
29 of 1953.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO, J. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the Punjab High Court and arises out of a suit for possession of land brought by Munshi Ram, respondent.
S. Bindra and Sardar Singh, for the appellant.
D. Ahuja and H. P. Wanchoo, for respondent No.
Nanak Chand died in 1939.
Munshi Rams natural father Hans Raj had predeceased Nanak Dhand.
