- (1.) This is a Plaintiffs appeal and arises in the following way: One Roshan Lal executed a will in respect of a one-third portion of a house of which portion he was the absolute owner under a partition. The will was in favour of his widow Bhagwan Dei. After Roshan Lal's death Bhagwan Dei and Tara Chand, a brother of Roshan Lal, filed a suit against Ram Narain, another brother claiming possession of the one-third portion of the house willed to Bhagwan Dei. It appeared that Ram Narain was at the date of that suit in possession of the portion. That suit was compromised and according to the terms of the compromise Bhagwan Dei was to live in the willed portion for her life and after her death Ram Narain and Tara Chand were to divide up that portion. A decree was passed in the suit in terms of the compromise Subsequently it appears that Bhagwan Dei executed a will in favour of the Defendants purporting to gift to them the one-third portion of the house which she had received from her husband and in respect of which she had entered into a compromise earlier with her husband's two brothers. Tara Chand, one of the brothers, is the grandfather of the present Defendants and Ram Narain, the other brother, is the grandfather of the present Plaintiffs.
(2.) The grandsons of Ram Narain filed the present partition suit and sought possession of a half of Bhagwan Dei's portion of the house. The suit was contested by the Defendants. The learned Munsif upon construction of the will of Roshan Lal came to the conclusion that Bhagwan Dei had received an absolute interest, that she was competent to enter into a compromise in the course of the previous litigation started by herself and Tara Chand against Ram Narain and that that compromise was binding upon the parties to that litigation and their successors in interest in the present suit. It also hold that the subsequent will of Bhagwan Dei whereby she attempted to will the same property in respect of which she had entered into a compromise in favour of the Defendants was ineffective. In this view of the matter the suit of the Plaintiffs was decreed and a preliminary decree for partition was passed by the learned Munsif. There was an appeal to the court below and the court below reversed the order of the learned Munsif and allowed the appeal and set aside the decree of the learned Munsif and dismissed the Plaintiffs suit.
(3.) The Plaintiffs have come up in appeal and their contention is that upon the true construction of the will of Roshan Lal dated 18-2-1931, an absolute estate passed to Bhagwan Dei and that as an absolute owner of the property she was entitled in the course of the litigation by herself and Tara Chand against Ram Narain to enter into a compromise and that that compromise was binding on the heirs of Ram Narain and Tara Chand, and the decree which was in terms of the compromise determined the rights of the present Plaintiffs and the present Defendants. It is urged that the Court below was wrong in coming to contrary conclusions.;