Renupada Mukherjee, J. - (1.) These two appeals arise out of two money suits, one of which was instituted by Swarnalata Bose, appellant in S. A. 1645 of 1953, and the other by Nirode Ranjan Ghosh, appellant in S. A. 1646 of 1953. The suit filed by Swarnalata in the Trial Court bore No. 34 of 1950, and the suit filed by Nirode bore No. 42 of 1950. The suit of Swarnalata was instituted for realisation of maintenance and annuity money provided in the will. Nirode's suit was instituted for realisation of annuity money provided in the same will; there was an additional claim for annuity money alleged to be due on an annuity bond executed by respondent Promode Chandra Roy Choudhury. The claim of the plaintiffs in both the suits was dismissed by the Trial Court which delivered one judgment in the two suits, and the decrees of dismissal passed by the Trial Court were confirmed in appeals by the Lower Appellate Court. So the two plaintiffs have preferred these two appeals which were heard analogously as some common questions of law and fact are involved in both the appeals.
(2.) The facts material for the purpose of these two appeals are not in dispute and they may thus be set out in brief:
(3.) One Mohim Chandra Roy Choudhury, a zamindar of Atharabari in Mymensingh district which is now included in East Pakistan, was the owner of considerable landed properties. He had two daughters, but no male issue. The daughters were Swarnalata Bose, appellant in one of these appeals, and Hemalata Ghose, deceased mother of the other appellant Nirode Ranjan Ghose. Before his death Mohim executed a will on 17th Aswin, 1297 B. S. (2nd October, 1890). Mohim gave hi3 wife Jnanada permission to adopt a son by a deed, dated 24th Magh, 1290 B. S. After the death of Mohim his will was duly probated and Jnanada also took respondent Promode Chandra Roy Choudhury in adoption. The will of Mohim contains various dispositions consistent with the magnitude of his properties. In these two appeals we are concerned with the interpretation and construction of terms 3Ga and 3Gha of the will which provide for payment of maintenance to his two daughters and annuities in their favour and also in favour of their sons and grandsons from generation to generation, Appellant Swarnalata has claimed a sum of Rs. 3880/9 as, from the respondent according to the terms of the will as being due, to her on account of unpaid maintenance and annuity money and also interest due on them. Appellant Nirode has similarly claimed a sum of Rs. 4798/5 as, in terms of the will as also on the basis of an annuity bond, dated 26-7-1923, executed between the respondent on one hand, and the descendants of Mohim, on the other, by way of settlement of their disputes.;