Sinha, J.

1. The first appeal arises out of a decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Gaya, dated 1st April 1946, for a declaration that certain transfers made by defendant 7 in favour of the defendants-first-party, that is to say, defendants 1 to 3, were fraudulent without consideration and inoperative as against the plaintiff. The second appeal is directed against the decision of the learned Additional District Judge of Gaya, dated 31st July 1946, affirming that of the Subordinate Judge of the same place in a suit for partition. As both the cases arise out of a dispute relating to the estate of the late Babu Kamta Prasad, and the matters in controversy are, more or less, allied to each other, the two cases have been heard together, and this judgment will govern them both.

2. In the first appeal, the suit was commenced by Kedar Nath, brother of the late Babu Kamta Prasad, Mukhtar, who died sometime in November 1940, leaving him surviving his widow, defendant 7, and eight daughters, some married and others unmarried. The plaintiff claimed that Kamta Prasad died in a state of jointness with him, and that his widow and his daughters had no right except that of maintenanc