(1.) This and the connected appeal (S.A. No. 1019 of 1928), arise out of a suit for possession of certain arazidari plots in mouza Kohri in the district of Gorakhpur. The entire village Kohri Buzurg was the property of Raja Krishna Kissen Chand. The plaintiff-respondent claims descent from him and his relationship with the Raja will appear from the following genealogical table:
(2.) The plaintiff alleges that the estate of Raja Krishna Kishore Chand was honey- combed with debts and the Raja was always beset with a swarm of creditors.
(3.) The Raja with a view to save his property executed a number of transfers in favour of his relations or dependents. These transfers were merely colourable and ware no more than cloaks to shield the property from creditors and that in fact Raja Krishna Kishore Chand continued to be the owner of the property transferred. As a part of the scheme he executed a conveyance of mouza Kohri Buzurg in favour of Rani Rajbans Kunwari. The property was successively transferred to Adhin Das, Harihar Prasad Chand and Mt. Nanhi Bibi, The woman last mentioned was a mistress in the keeping of the Raja. On 18 July 1870 Mt. Nanhi Bibi executed a sale-deed relating to mouza Kohri Buzurg in favour of Mt. Mohan Kunwari, wife of Raja Mohan Prasad Chand. The plaintiff's case is that no consideration passed under the sale-deed and this transaction was the machinery employed for obtaining an acknowledgment from Mt, Nanhi Bibi that she was not the owner of the property and that the real owner of the property was Raja Mahadeo Prasad Chand. On 13 May 1914, Mt. Mohan Kunwari sold the property in dispute to Sheotahal Dubey, the defendant-appellant for an ostensible consideration of Rs. 2.100. The plaintiff alleges that Mt. Mohan Kunwari was not the owner of the property, that he was the owner of the property by reason of his descend from Raja Mahadeo Prasad Chand and that he alone was entitled to claim the property from the vendee by reason of a custom in the family whereby the property vested in a single heir and the rule of primogeniture prevailed. By a subsequent amendment, the plaintiff claimed to recover this property by reason of being a cosharer with his brother Raj Bahadur Chand and his cousin Bir Bahadur Chand, who are alleged to be members of a joint family with him.