JUDGMENT

1. The following is the pedigree table of the persons connected with this appeal:

Image

cross-objections on the appeal of Mt. Budhwanti.

Bansi Lal died without issue on the 30th June, 1897, and the present suit was lodged, on the 20th of February, 1909, by. Amar Nath. The plaint alleged that in a collusive suit between the two widows of Bansi Lal, Mt. Budhwanti and Mt. Bishen Kaur, a compromise had been effected declaring that after the death of the widows the whole of Bansi Lal's estate would be dedicated to a temple and other buildings for religious or quasi-religious purposes erected on a certain site in Anarkali Bazar, Lahore, and that the terms of the compromise professed to be in accordance with those of an oral Will made by Bansi Lal before his death which Will the plaintiff denied.

2. A decree was sought for a declaration' that the compromise did not affect the plaintiffs' reversionary right, after the deaths of the widows.

3. By order of the Trial Court, dated the 3rd of April, 1908, Panna Lal was allowed to join Amar Nath as a plaintiff. On the 16th of December, 1909, Jowala Dat Parshad and on the 28th of April, 1910, Prem Nath were joined as defendants.

4. The widows pleaded that the suit between them was not collusive, that the compromise did not amount to an alienation and therefore, gave no cause of action, that Bansi Lal's property had been decided by his Will which bad been acted upon and acquiesced in by the plaintiff and that the plaintiff's suit was time-barred. (His Lordship recited the issues framed in the trial of the suit and the findings that were arrived at thereon and continued). The cumulative result was that the plaintiffs were given a decree declaring that the compromise, dated the 22nd of February, 1903, should not affect their reversionary right in the estate left by Bansi Lal, provided that they should not disturb the temple.

5. Against this decision there are two appeals : one by Mt. Budhwanti, the only surviving widow and the other by Amar Nath, while Amar Nath also preferred

6. Mt. Budhwanti's appeal was presented on the 23rd of June, 1917, and on the 23rd of August, 1918, she died. Mt. Tehl Kaur, the step-mother of Bansi Lal, applied on the 5th of February, 1919, to be brought on the record as her legal representative, and the application was granted subject to all just exceptions. On the appeal coming before us for hearing, it has been objected that Mt. Tehl Kaur has no locus standi to continue the appeal and that the appeal abates since the right to appeal does not survive the death of Mt. Budhwanti.

7. (The arguments of the Counsel for Mb.. Tehl Kuar ware mentioned here.)

8. After hearing Counsel on both sides at some length we have decided that Mt. Tehl Kaur is the legal representative of Mt. Budhwanti in this latter sense [i.e., according to Civil P.C., Section 2 (11)]. Mt. Bhudwanti defended the suit and appealed as one of several persons interested in asserting the dedication to religious and public uses of Bansi Lal's estate.

9. Mt. Tehl Kaur appears to us to. be the only surviving member of the family interested in maintaining the alleged Will of Bansi Lal, the terms of which, as well as the compromise, made distinct provision for her own maintenance. She could, we think, claim validly that Mt. Budhwanti's interest as manager of the alleged wakf devolved upon her since all the male heirs of Bansi Lal has refused to recognize any wakf and there was no-other person upon whom it could devolve. The appeal and cross objections by Amar Nath can be disposed of in a very few words. The respondents to the appeal are Mt. Budhwanti and Panna Lal. Two of the four paragraphs of the memorandum of appeal, Nos. 2 and 3, relate exclusively to Panna Lal and have been withdrawn with prejudice. Paragraph - 1 affects Mt. Budhwanti against whom the appeal has abated. No application has been made by the appellant; to substitute any legal representative for her and without this there can be no question of set