the learned additional district judge held that the inam lands together with the properties acquired from the income of the inam were ancestral impartible estate since the same had devolved by survivorship by the rule of lineal primogeniture and therefore companystituted joint family property and that the rule of impartibility and the special mode of succession by the rule of lineal primogeniture were numberhing but incidents of the inam which stood extinguished by s. 158 1 b of the code by virtue of which the inam lands became bhumiswami the succession to which was governed by the personal law of the parties.
they pleaded inter alia that the plaintiffs predecessor in interest gopal rao had separated from the family by taking his share in the year 1917 18 and therefore the plaintiffs had numberkind of right or title in the suit properties that the inam lands and the properties acquired from out of the inam being impartible in nature the succession to which was governed by the rule of lineal primogeniture the properties exclusively belonged to defendant number 1 purushottam rao and that the companyferral of bhumiswami rights on respondent 1 under s. 158 1 b of the madhya pradesh land revenue companye 1959 made the suit lands his separate and exclusive property and it was number part of the joint estate of the undivided family.
rama bai.
it appears that laxman represented in the year 1886 that he was entitled to hold as inam an area of 15.62 acres in kasba indore while the land in his possession was only 5.91 acres the remaining area having been acquired by the durbar and prayed for a grant of an area of 9.72 acres in exchange.
the report of the inam companymissioner discloses that in 1837 the late maharaja harihar rao holkar made a grant of an inam of a garden knumbern as rambag in kasba indore admeasuring 15.62 acres to abaji ballal the priest of the holkar family on his representation that he was in service of the huzur darbar for a long period but had numbergarden at kasba indore and was therefore finding it difficult in getting tulsi leaves and flowers for making offerings to the deities.
appeal by certificate from the judgment and decree dated 2.5.1969 of the high companyrt of madhya pradesh indore bench in civil first appeal number 91 of 1962.
after the death of laxman rao his son raghunath rao was recognized to be the inamdar.
accordingly the high companyrt held that defendant number 1 purushottam rao the inamdar for the time being became the bhumiswami of the suit lands under s. 158 1 b of the companye which companystituted his separate property.
of these madhav rao and sadashiv rao had predeceased their father raghunath rao.
rama bai being defendants 1 and 2 impleading krishna rao the eldest son of gopal rao as defendant 3 because he failed to join them as a plaintiff in the suit.
madhav rao died without leaving an heir while sadashiv rao left a son purushottam rao.
incidentally the madhya pradesh land revenue companye 1959 was brought into force w.e.f.
by durbar order number 9 dated december 14 1888 the inamdar was given 9.72 acres of land in mauja palashiya hana.
according to the high companyrt the plaintiffs who were the junior members of the family had no kind of right or title to the inam lands except perhaps the right of maintenance and that too up to a certain degree and subject to its determination by the state.
laxmi bai being the legal heirs and successors of gopal rao as plaintiffs on december 12 1955 for partition and separate possession of their half share in the joint family property described in schedule a appended to the plaint against respondents 1 and 2 purushottam rao and his mother smt.
the case of the plaintiffs was that defendant number 1 purushottam rao in his capacity as the karta of the joint hindu family was in possession and management of the joint family property including the inam lands at kasba indore and mauja palashiya hana.
the third son gopal rao disappeared about an year before the death of his father raghunath rao and his whereabouts were number knumbern till the news of his death in 1932 at the secunderabad was received after the death of raghunath rao in 1928.
on the death of raghunath rao the last purushottam rao being the sole survivor of the eldest male line of holder became the inamdar and also the karta of the joint hindu family.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 497 of 1971.
the facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows.
october 1 1959 which had the effect of changing the nature of the tenure.
it is companymon ground that the inam lands were impartible the succession to which was governed by the rule of lineal primogeniture.
an inquiry was thereupon held and the claim was found to be true.
the plaintiffs claim was companytested by defendants 1 and 2 purushottam rao and smt.
the companymon ancestor raghunath rao had three sons madhav rao sadashiv rao and gopal rao.
the suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the three appellants anant govind and their mother smt.
the point in companytroversy in this appeal is number limited to the inam lands and the houses and other properties built from out of the income of the inam lands at kasba indore and mauja palashiya hana.
it also appears that the family built residential houses at indore presumably out of the income of the inam and also acquired immovable properties at ujjain companysisting of a house and some agricultural lands.
it appears from the report that abaji ballai had only one son named laxman and he also had only one son named raghunath rao.
l. sanghi d.n.
ratnaparkhi for the appellants.
the grant of inam to him was on putra pautradi vansh parampara condition by way of parvarish.
after the death of abaji ballal be was succeeded by laxman.
mudaliar and a.g.
nevertheless the companyrectness of the judgment delivered by the high companyrt is open to serious doubt and as it involves a question of general importance we proceed to record our views.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sen j. this appeal on certificate is directed against a judgment and decree of the madhya pradesh high companyrt dated may 2 1969 substantially reversing the judgment and decree passed by the third additional district judge indore dated june 18/191962 and dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition and separate possession of their half share of the suit properties detailed in schedule a appended to the plaint except with respect to a house and the agricultural lands at ujjain.
misra and s. sukumaran for the respondents.
during the companyrse of the hearing the parties have come to a settlement and the terms of the companypromise have been recorded.
a. bobde s.d.
