1955 (3) TMI 39 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Ownership and inheritance of the properties in dispute.
2. Validity of the family arrangement and its binding effect.
3. Estoppel and the plaintiff's conduct.
4. Legal effect of the alienations and the reversioner's rights.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Ownership and Inheritance of the Properties in Dispute:
The plaintiff, Mukand Ram, claimed that the properties belonged to Nanak Chand and were inherited by his widow Mst. Pato and subsequently by their three daughters. Upon the death of the last daughter, Har Devi, in 1919, the plaintiff's rights as reversioner accrued. The defendants contended that the properties belonged to Mst. Pato as part of her personal estate and were distributed by her through a family arrangement.

2. Validity of the Family Arrangement and Its Binding Effect:
The defendants argued that Mst. Pato executed a family arrangement in 1875, distributing the properties among her daughters and grandsons, making them absolute owners. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's claims, finding that the properties did not form part of Nanak Chand's estate and that the family arrangement was valid. The High Court reversed this, holding that the properties were part of Nanak Chand's estate and that the family arrangement was voluntary and not binding on the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court found that the family arrangement was indeed proved through consistent conduct and admissions by the family members. The court held that whether the properties belonged to Nanak Chand or Mst. Pato, the family arrangement was valid and binding on the daughters, who were parties to it and received consideration.

3. Estoppel and the Plaintiff's Conduct:
The plaintiff's conduct, including admissions and a long series of transactions asserting absolute ownership, indicated assent to the family arrangement. The court found that the plaintiff, Mukand Ram, had consistently asserted such a title and had benefited from the arrangement. His admissions to Shyam Lal and the conduct of the family members over a long period established the family arrangement and precluded the plaintiff from challenging it.

4. Legal Effect of the Alienations and the Reversioner's Rights:
The court held that the alienations made by the daughters and grandsons were valid under the family arrangement. The plaintiff's assent to the arrangement, either explicitly or through conduct, bound him and prevented him from avoiding the alienations. The principle that an alienation by a widow is voidable and not void was applied, and the reversioner's assent to the alienation was found to be binding.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's decrees, and restored the trial court's judgments dismissing the plaintiff's claims. The plaintiff was ordered to pay costs, divided between the two sets of appellants. The family arrangement was upheld, and the plaintiff's challenge to the alienations was dismissed based on his conduct and the established family arrangement.