MAHADEO KASAUDHAN Vs. GAYA DIN KASAUDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have arisen out of two separate suits but as they relate to the same property both appeals have been heard together. The property in dispute consists of a house which for the sake of convenience we will describe as house No. 2 situate in Muhalla Muftipur in the City of Gorakhpur.

(2.) The parties to the litigation are members of a family descended from one Ghisiawan Kasaudhan. The plaintiff in the suit out of which Appeal No. 1020 of 1923 has arisen was one Gaya Din, the father-in-law of Basant Lal, one of the members of this family. He seeks to attach a one-third share said to be the property of Ranbya. In the other suit which has given rise to Second Appeal No. 1662 of 1924, the sons of Basant Lal sue for the partition of a one-third share.

(3.) It is not disputed now, and indeed cannot be disputed, that in view of what was decided in a previous litigation, the descendants of Ghisiawan Kasaudhan constituted a joint Hindu family up till the end of the year 1913 when one of them, Bhairon, son of Chedi died. This house with which we are concerned appears to have been purchased on the 20 of November 1920, in the name of Mahadeo, son of Bhairon. The Additional Judge who decided the appeal from which Second Appeal No. 1662 has been brought was of opinion that although this house had been purchased in the name of Mahadeo it really was purchased with funds supplied by his father Bhairon. That is a finding of fact behind which the parties cannot go in second appeal.