The main legal point established in the judgment is that a Hindu reversioner's interest is not transferable and a sale by the guardian of a minor with no transferable interest is void.

Kinkhede, A J C—The plaintiffs are the appellants in this case. They base their title on a sale-deed executed on 11th January 1915 by one Bablaji, the husband of Mt. Jani, defendant 6, who was then a minor. The plaintiffs' case is that they were put in possession of the property purchased by them in November 1919, but were unlawfully dispossessed by the defendants in July 1920. Hence this suit was instituted on 28th, June 1924 for recovery of possession of the property from the defendants. Plaint is silent as to how the property became the property of Mt. Jani.

2. Defendant 1 contended that the property in suit was originally the property of Ganpat who died in 1911, leaving widow Mt. Soni, mother Gopi and sister Jani. On his death his widow Soni inherited it; that as she was alive and Jani had only a contingent reversionary interest at the date of sale there could be no transfer in view of Section 6, T.P. Act, in plaintiffs favour; and that plaintiffs acquired no title under the sale-deed. Defendants 1 and 2 purchased one-fourth share of the field in suit from Ganpat's widow Soni and she gifted an other one-fourth share to Maroti's temple, defendant 4, the same day and the remaining half-share was sold by her to defendant 3 on 14th April 1919; and that ever since their purchase defendants 1 to 4 bad been in peaceful and uninterrupted possession of their respective shares. On 17th April 1924, defendant 1 sold 8 acres of the land purchased by him and his brother, defendant 2, to Jani, defendant 6, and that ever since she had been in possession thereof, defendant 5 had purchased one-eighth share in the field in suit under a sale-deed dated 11th February 1915 from, defendant 1.

3. There were several oral pleadings, the gist whereof is that the property in suit originally belonged to one Baliram, that on his death it came to Ganpat who died in 1911, and that on his death without issue his widow Soni inherited it, but that she re-married in 1919 and and that Jani, the sister of Ganpat, had, therefore, only spes successions in 1915, when the property was sold by her guardian. Defendants denied that plaintiff had ever any possession over the property and that they were dispossessed. Defendants also pleaded an oral will in favour of Ganpat. The plaintiffs denied the alleged will in favour of Ganpat; but asserted that according to the oral will of Baliram the property had become the property of Gopi. On behalf of Jani, who was joined as a party, a, defence was raised that the transaction of sale in favour of plaintiffs was not real or for consideration and was not binding on her in the absence of any legal necessity or benefit. To this the plaintiffs replied that this defence of Jani was barred inasmuch as she did not sue to set aside the sale within threes years of her attaining majority. There were several other pleadings, but with them I am not concerned for the purposes of second appeal. The pleadings reproduced above sufficiently cover the points actually argued before me.

4. As regards the question of oral will of Bali ram being in favour of Ganpat or Gopi the Courts below have come to the conclusion that Baliram willed away the fields in suit to Ganpat and not to Gopi. It may here be mentioned that Gopi admittedly died in 1913 when Soni, the widow of Ganpat, had not remarried. If the alleged will in favour of Gopi had been proved then Gopi would have been fresh stock of descent and her daughter Jani would have succeeded on her death in 1913 to the field as her stridhan. But in view of the finding that Baliram's oral will was in favour of Ganpat and that he died in 1911, Ganpat was the last male owner and as such succession had to be traced to him, and, Jani being only his sister his widow Soni had a more preferential claim to the property which devolved on her in preference to Ganpat's mother Gopi or sister Jani; Soni thus continued to be the owner of the property so long as she had not either sold it away or got herself rem