N.N. Tiwari, J. - (1.) The defendant Nos. 1 and 2 In the original suit are the appellants in this appeal. The plaintiff-Yadubanshi Devi and Manmati Kaur had filed Title Suit No. 34 of 1980 in the Court of Subordinate Judge No. III, Palamau at Daltonganj praying for declaration of title and confirmation of possession over the suit land. The plaintiffs claimed inheritance by virtue of the provisions of Act No. 2 of 1929 of Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment Act, 1929).
(2.) The plaintiffs case, in brief, was that they are the grand daughters of the original owner-Sheo Karan Pandey. The said Sheo Karan Pandey died in the year 1945 leaving behind two widows, namely, Masomat Lakhpati Kaur and Masomat Jasmati Kaur. Masomat Lakhpati Kaur and Sheo Karan Pandey had one daughter. namely, Maheshwari Devi, who died before her mother-Masomat Lakhpati Kaur, leaving behind the plaintiffs-Yadubanshi Devi and Manmati Kaur. Sheo Karan Pandey had no son. He had kept the husband of Maheshwari Devi-father of the plaintiffs as 'Ghar Damad'. After the death of Shiv Karan Pandey, his two widows had amicably partitioned the properties with an agreement that they shall not interfere with the cultivation of each other. The two widows since thereafter had been leaving separately, their cultivation was also separated. In the year 1950-51, Masomat Lakhpati Devi and registered a sale-deed dated 22.8.1952 in favour of plaintiffs transferring the suit land in their favour. The plaintiffs were also put in possession of the said land. The plaintiffs claimed that the suit land was already partitioned between the two widows-Masomat Lakhpati Devi and Masomat Jasmati Kaur. After the death of Masomat Lakhpati Devi, they also inherited the properties as the heirs of Masomat Lakhpati Devi. The plaintiffs further claimed that they have been in continuous possession of the suit land with full knowledge of the defendants. Masomat Jasmati Kaur had filed a title suit seeking declaration that the sale-deeds executed in favour of the plaintiffs is null and void. The said was against Masomat Lakhpati Devi, who died during pendency of the suit and her heirs were not substituted and made party and, as such, the judgment in the said title suit is not binding on them. They remained in uninterrupted possession and also perfected their title by adverse possession. The defendants in spite of that were threatening to dispossess the plaintiffs from the suit land, which gave rise to a cause of action for the suit.
(3.) Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 contested the suit. It was contended that Sheo Karan Pandey died in the year 1945 leaving behind two widows and two daughters-Maheshwari Devi through Lakhpati Kaur and Uchhanti Devi through Jasmati Kaur. The entire property after the death of Sheo Karan Pandey came in possession of two widows-Lakhpati Kaur and Jasmati Kaur. The property remained joint till the death of Lakhpati Kaur in 1953 and after her death, the entire property of late Sheo Karan Pandey inclusive of the suit land came in exclusive possession of Jasmati Kaur by survivors hip. Masomat Jasmati Kaur came in possession of the entire property and after the commencement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956,. Masomat Jasmati Kaur became absolute owner of the property left behind by late Sheo Karan Pandey. Sale-deed dated 22.8.1952 executed by Masomat Lakhpati Kaur in favour of plaintiffs conferred no right, title, as Masomat Lakhpati Kaur had no right to alienate the property. The said validity of the sale-deed was challenged in Title Suit No. 36/53.;