The trial companyrt held that the document of 1906 was number a deed of gift.
Thus Jira Bai and her three sons had four annas share each in the said properties.
Padumnath died on 10 4 1938.
There had been some litigation in 1923.After the decision of the Court mutation took place and 3/4 share in the property was recorded in the name of Padumnath and 1/4 in the name of Ramdulari.
On 9 2 1938, Padumnath made a gift of his 1/4 share in favour of his daughter Kamalabai alias Kamalabai.
The property thus came to be divided into three shares 1/3 each to Jira Bai, Padumnath and Ramdulari.
In the month of November, 1918 both Brindaban and Mathura Prasad died.
Jotkunwars husband, Raghurai, had a brother Ramprasad who died in 1902 leaving two sons Sheoshankar Dayal, the plaintiff in the present suit, and Ramdayal who died in 1918.Sheoshankar Dayal filed the present suit on 25 1 1943.His case was that the document of 1906 was a deed of gift and number a deed of surrender in favour of the next reversioneRuleOn the death of Jotkunwar he was entitled to the suit property as the gift companyld number operate after her death.
2 and 3 was affirmed by the High Court.
One Mst.
Mathura Prasad was unmarried and Brindaban left a widow, Mst.
The trial companyrt further found that Kamalabati and Ramdulari had been in adverse possession of the properties from 26 7 1927.The plaintiffs suit was accordingly barred by limitation.
Ramdulari.
Nankaiya died in 1909 and on his death his share was recorded in the names of Jira Bai and her two sons Brindaban and Mathura Prasad.
Jotkunwar, however, reserved to herself cultivating rights in sir lands companysisting of 91.5 acres.
Jira Bai died on 26 7 1927.
Jotkunwar executed a document in 1906 in favour of her daughter Jira Bai and the sons of Jira Bai, Brindaban, Mathura Prasad and Nankaiya, transferring to them the properties mentioned in the document.
The interest of Mathura Prasad was mutated in favour of Padumnath, husband of Jira Bai, and that of Brindaban in favour of his widow, Ramdulari.
Jafer Imam, J. This is an appeal against the decision of the Nagpur High Court partly reversing the decision of the Extra Subordinate Judge, First Class, BilaspuRule The decree of the trial companyrt companycerning houses Nos.
