The possession of one co-sharer cannot be adverse to the other co-sharers. However, if a co-sharer sets up a hostile title to the land, then his possession can be adverse to the other co-sharers.

1. A suit filed by the plaintiff-appellants for a declaration of title or in the alternative for possession of the land in dispute was dismissed by the trial court and the first appeal filed by the plaintiffs had also remained unsuccessful. The plaintiffs have therefore, come to this Court in second appeal under Section 100 of the code of the Civil Procedure.

2. Dharam Singh, the first cousin of the plaintiff-appellants was a joint owner with the appellants, of the land in dispute. He owned a half share while the other half share belonged to the appellants. Dharam Singh died on August 28, 1944 and the mutation of succession, copy Exhibit P-7 was attested in favour of Smt. Ram Kaur defendant-respondent who was described as the widow the deceased during those mutation proceedings. The mutation order had been duly attested in favour of the defendant-respondent in an open gathering of the village on December 19, 1946 and there is a note in the register of mutations that the appellants had filed an appeal against that mutation of succession and that this appeal had been dismissed on December 18, 1947.

3. The dispute about succession to Dharam Singhs half share in the land was not agitated in any Court for a period of more than twelve years until the present suit was filed by the plaintiff-appellants in October, 1960. It was alleged that Ram Kaur respondent was not the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased and that she had no right to succeed to Dharam Singhs half share in the land. The plaintiffs claimed to be in possession and sought a declaration that they were owners of the entire land. In the alternative a decree of possession of the deceaseds half share in the land in dispute had been prayed for.

4. The parties joined issues on about half a dozen points. The plaintiff-appellants relationship with the deceased was also made a point in controversy even though the defendant-respondent had admitted that the appellants were the first cousins of her deceased husband. The learned trial court had actually found on the basis of an accidental omission in a certified copy of the shajra nasab. Exhibit P-1 that the plaintiff-appellants were not proved to be collateral of Dharam Singh deceased. The learned lower appellate Court has upset this finding of the trial Court as also the finding that Ram Kaur was proved to be the lawfully wedded wife of the deceased. The reason given was that Ram Kaur could not have lawfully remarried Dharam Singh during the life-time of her first husband. The parties are tarkhans who are shudras and are as such admittedly not included in the twice born classes of Hindus. It is also in evidence that the tarikhans own and cultivate lands and are in such matters governed by custom. The strict principles of Hindu Law would not, therefore, be applicable to these agriculturists of tarkhan caste who are not high caste Hindus. As early as in 1913 the Punjab Chief Court had found in Ishar Singh V/s. Mt. Budhi. (1913) 19 Ind Cas 460 (Lah) that amongst Sikh Jats of tehsil Shakargarh of district Gurdaspur, the custom of divorcing a woman by repudiation was in existence and that the repudiated woman was free to remarry in the lifetime of her first husband. The marriage was legally valid even in the absence of proof of any ceremony of marriage is karewa or chadar andazi form. Reference could also be made in this connection to a Single Bench decision of this Court to Mt. Angrez Kaur V/s. Gurdit Singh, (1962) 64 Pun LR 1179. Question and answer No. 20 of the Riwaj-i-am of Ferozepore district to which area the parties belong was brought to the notice of the Court. It records that among the Jats and other Hindus, divorce is normally impossible but that the custom of a man turning out his wife was well recognised and that she was at liberty to remarry. The institution of divorce by repudiation was found to be widely recognised in the neighbouring districts of Ferozepore, Jullundur, Ludhiana and Ambala etc. The Single Bench d