Kuber Nath Srivastava, J. - (1.) This is an appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff appellants, arising out of the following facts: The plaintiffs brought a suit with the allegations that the disputed land belonged to one Raghubans Rao, who was succeeded by his mother Rani Mahalakshmi. The Rani entered into a family settlement with the plaintiffs and defendants Nos. 3 to 7. The plaintiffs and these defendants asserted that they were collaterals of Raghubans Rao. By this family settlement the disputed land and certain other properties were given to the plaintiffs and defendants Nos. 3 to 7. According to the plaintiffs, they were in possession of the land in dispute, and as the defendant No. 1 started construction on the disputed land without any right or title, therefore, they brought the suit for declaration and injunction. The defendant No. 1 contested the suit and alleged that his father Beni Prasad succeeded to the property on the death of Shanker Lal, to whom it belonged, as his daughter's son, and after the death of his father, the property had been in his possession. According to this defendant, Shanker Lal was the father of Ganpat Gopal, the father of Raghubans Rao. It was alleged that the Rani had no right, title or interest in the disputed property so as to entitle him to enter into any family settlement.
(2.) The learned Munsif held that the family settlement was valid, and that the Rani was in possession of the disputed property as a widow, and she rightly entered into the family settlement with the plaintiffs. On these findings, the suit was decreed.
(3.) The defendant No. 1 filed an appeal. The lower appellate court held that there was a family settlement, but the plaintiffs were not the members of the family of Raghubans Rao and, therefore, the family settlement was not binding on the defendant No. 1. It was also held that the defendant No. 1 was the rightful owner of the properties and, therefore, the plaintiffs were not entitled to a decree on the basis of their possessory title. On these findings, the appeal was allowed, the judgment and decree passed by the trial court were set aside, and the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed with costs.;