JUDGMENT

V.D. Bhargava, J. - This is an appeal from the decision of a learned single. Judge of this Court in a second appeal.

2. The following pedigree is necessary in order to understand the facts of the case :

                                                                                     DEBI DIN=TULSHA                                                                                                   |        ___________________________________________________________________________________________________          |                                                 |                                         |                                |                                           |Ram Charan= Tulsha               Ram Prasad=Brijrani                 Ram Sahai                      Ram Dei                 Ram Sarup=Ram Piari  (alias Bari Bahu)                    (Alias Manjhli Bahu)                     O.S.P.                              |                          (alias Chhoti Bahu)     Defendant 5                             Defendant 1                                                                 |                                      Plaintiff          |                                                |                                                _____________________________                   |      Munni(Dead)                       Shyam Behari=Ganga                             |                                                 |          Shyam Manohar                                                      (Defendant 2)                         Jagdish Prasad                             Mahesh Prasad                                                                                                     (Defendant 3)                                  (Defendant 2)

3. In November, 1913, Ram Sahai having died previously, Debi Din and his three surviving sons Ram Charan, Ram Prasad and Ram Sarup divided the family property by a private partition. Properties entered at (a) and (b) of list A attached to the plaint were allotted to Ram Charan and that at (c) was allotted to Ram Sarup.

4. Ram Charan died in November, 1917, and was succeeded by his widow Srimati Tulsha alias Ban Bahu who is defendant No 5 in this suit. She transferred half of the property of item (b) and whole of item (a) to Ram Sarup purporting to do so under the oral will of her deceased husband. The remaining half of item (b) she transferred by the same deed to Shiam Bihari and reserved to herself a maintenance allowance of Rs. 15/- P. M. which she made a charge upon all the properties transferred.

5. Ram Sarup died in 1923 and was succeeded by his minor son Shiam Manohar who also died six months later and therefore the plaintiff Srimati Ram Piari alias Chhoti Bahu became the owner of half of item (b) and item (a) and item (c). By the deed Ex. 3 dated 15-12-1924, she surrendered all her rights in favour, of her mother-in-law Srimati Tulsha reserving to herself a right of residence and a sum of Rs. 20/- P. M. for. her maintenance. This allowance was made a charge upon the property conveyed by her to her mother-in-law.

6. On 19-2-1926 Srimati Tulsha executed a deed, Ex. 4, relinquishing the property surrendered by Srimati Ram Piari, the plaintiff, in favour of her husband Debi Din who became the owner of it subject to the charge.

7. On 1-5-1930 Debi Din executed a will by which he made arrangements for the entire property then owned by him. This will is Ex. All, Therein he recites that there is no co-sharer in the property which he was bequeathing and since it was necessary to make arrangements of his property so that there may be no disputes after his death between his heirs and dependants he executed that deed. Shortly after the execution of the will Debi Din died. Shiam Bihari also died in 1940.

8. On 12-12-1946, Ram Piari instituted this suit out of which this special appeal arises for recovery of Rs. 1,900/- at the rate of Rs. 20/- per mensem from 1-12-1938 to the