JAGDISH SAHAI, J. : The question referred to this Full Bench is as follows :-

"Whether an alienation of ancestral joint family property by a Hindu father is not binding on his son if it was made for inadequate consideration, even if there was legal necessity ? In order to answer it correctly, it would be necessary to give in short the facts and the circumstances which have given rise to the question.

2. The appellant, Dudh Nath, filed the suit giving rise to this appeal for possession over the property described at the foot of the plaint (hereinafter referred to as the property in dispute) on the allegations that the plaintiff his brother, Pashupati Nath, defendant No. 3, and their father, Panna Ram. formed a joint Hindu family which was possessed of ancestral property including the property in dispute and that Panna Ram without any legal necessity first executed a mortgage deed in respect of the property in dispute without consideration and later on 25-7-1927 sold it to Antu Ram for a sum of Rs. 500. It is alleged that the market value if the property sold is not less than 2500 and the sale was without legal necessity. The property in dispute consists of some Zamindari prop