Adoption of a daughter's son by a male Jain is valid according to the custom prevailing in the Saraogi Agarwal community.

( 1 ) THIS is defendants second appeal against the decision dated 16. 2. 1998 tn First Appeal No. 296 of 1997 decided by Sri M. P. Singh. District Judge, Saharanpur. The said appeal arose out of Suit no. 124 of 1967 which was decreed by Sri R. C. Pande, the then Civil Judge. (Senior Division)on 19. 5. 1977.

( 2 ) HEARD Sri Murlidhar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ran Vijay Singh for the defendants-appellants and Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri R. B. D. Misra for the plaintiffs-respondents.

( 3 ) SREECHAND Jain who is adopted son of late Lala Chetan Das instituted a suit against his natural father and mother and 6 real brothers for possession after ejectment from the property, which has been detailed in Schedules a and b of the plaint. Besides the relief of possession, he also sought declaration that he is owner in possession over the properly detailed in Schedule c of the plaint, in the alternative, relief of possession over the said property was also claimed. A claim for damages was also preferred.

( 4 ) IT is accepted at all hands that Lala Chetan Das was the owner of the property in dispute, i. e. , a kothi known as old income Tax Office situated at Rampur Road (now known as Delhi Road) in the city of Saharanpur, which was purchased by him on an auction sale in the year 1942. The said Kolhi consists of main building and outhouses. The remaining portion of the open land is in the form of a grove. Lala Chetan Das had no son. His daughter. Smt. Jain, was married to Lala deep Chand Jain. Sreechand Jain, the plaintiff is one of their ten sons. Lala Chetan Das adopted sreechand Jain who happened to be the son of his daughter, in the year 1942 and executed a memorandum of adoption. Lala Chetan Das, thereafter, relinquished his rights in the property in favour of the adopted son in his life-time through a gift deed dated 19. 1. 1945. Lala Chetan Das died on 14. 12. 1945. Deep Chand Jain became owner of properties of the adoptive father. Originally, Lala Deep Chand Jain and Smt. Jain along ~ with their sons and daughters were residing with the plaintiff Sreechand Jain in the house in Mohalla Fatak. On account of expansion of the family, Lala Deep Chand Jain and Smt. Jain sought permission from the plaintiff-Sreechand Jain to reside in the house in suit. It is alleged that with the permission of the plaintiff-respondent, they shifted from Mohalla Fatak to the Kothi in suit along with their sons. The plaintiff-respondent revoked the licence in October, 1966 and asked the defendant-appellants and other defendants to vacate the Kothi in question. The plaintiff claimed himself to be the owner of the Kothi in dispute and alleged that the possession of the defendant-appellants was permissive and since their licence has been revoked, they are liable to be evicted. Accordingly, with the above allegations, the suit was filed for the reliefs mentioned above. The defendant-respondents as well as other defendants filed their written statement. It was admitted that the plaintiff-respondent was adapted by Lala Chetan Das and that the Kothi in question which belonged to Lala Chetan Das, came to be owned by the plaintiff-respondent as the adopted son. It was further alleged that there was a family settlement between the plaintiff and his natural father-defendant No. 1 in the year 1944 by which it was settled that the plaintiff-respondent will give 1/3rd share of the property of Lala Chetan Das to his natural father lala Deep Chand Jain. The plaintiff, il is alleged, refused to abide by the family settlement. Thereafter, it is alleged that Smt. Jain, natural mother of the plaintiff-respondent, started claiming the entire property as daughter of Lala Chetan Das and she also alleged that adoption of plaintiff by Lala Chetan Das was illegal. A new family settlement in August, 1949 was, it is alleged, entered into between the parties, as has been mentioned in paragraph 23 of the written statement, th