JUDGMENT

Smith, J - This is an appeal from a decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Malihabad at Lucknow, dated 30th October 1930. The litigation which has given rise to this appeal relates to the property of one Abdul Rauf Ehan of Mirzaganj, (Malihabad), who died on 14th October 1924. The facts relevant to the appeal may be shortly stated and the following short pedigree will be useful for reference.

      TABLE

2. Abdul Rauf Khan was the owner of certain zamindari property in Tahsil Malihabad. His son, Abdul Ghafur Khan, died in or about December 1913, leaving him surviving his son, Nasir Ahmad, aged about 13 years. On 3rd March 1914 Abdul Rauf Khan executed a registered will (Ex. A-1) in favour of Nasir Ahmad Khan (defendant 1) in respect of a 5 annas 4 pies share in his property. The will was signed by Abdul Bari Khan, plaintiff 1, (son of Abdul Rauf Khan) and Mt. Intizam Begam, plaintiff 2 (wife of Abdul Rauf Khan). On 9th March 1914, Abdul Rauf Khan executed a deed of gift (Ex. A-2) in respect of a 2 annas 8 pies share in his property in favour of Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1. This transfer by gift was duly given effect to. Mutation was duly effected in favour of Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1, under the guardianship of his grandfather Abdul Rauf Khan. On that very date Abdul Rauf Khan executed another deed of gift (Ex. A-3) in respect of certain plots in favour of his son Abdul Bari Khan, plaintiff 1 and his grandson Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1. On 18th March 1914 Abdul Rauf Khan executed a document (Ex. A-4) in favour of his wife, Mt. Intizam Begam, plaintiff 2, providing for her a maintenance allowance of Rs. 20 per month for her life. This was charged on half of the property which Abdul Rauf Khan intended to retain for himself, and which was to be inherited by his son Abdul Bari Khan, plaintiff 1, after his death. On the same date Mt. Intizam Begam, plaintiff 2, executed a document (Ex. A-5) relinquishing her claim to dower and inheritance.

3. In July 1914, Abdul Rauf Khan was appointed certificated guardian of Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1 on his own application. Abdul Rauf Khan then settled the marriage of Nasir Ahmad Khan, (defendant 1) in the year 1919. The bride's parents insisted on a deed of agreement being executed in favour of the bride guaranteeing payment of an allowance of Rs. 40 per month. Abdul Rauf Khan then asked the District Judge to permit him to hypothecate the 2 annas 8 pies share of the minor in order to satisfy the parents of the bride. It appears that the income of the said share was not more than Rs. 30 per month. The District Judge refused to sanction the hypothecation of the property unless and until Abdul Rauf Khan gave an undertaking that he would not revoke the will of 3rd March 1914, so that the minor (Nasir Ahmad Khan) should get the willed property also after the death of Abdul Rauf Khan. Abdul Rauf Khan then executed the deed of agreement on 10th April 1919. The proposal was then sanctioned by the District Judge, and the deed of hypothecation was executed by Abdul Rauf Khan,' on behalf of Nasir Ahmad Khan, in favour of the bride of Nasir Ahmad Khan, on 10th April 1919. Thus the marriage of Nasir Ahmad Khan took place some time after 10th April 1919. On the death of Abdul Rauf Khan, Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1, applied for mutation on the basis of the registered will of Abdul Rauf Khan dated 3rd March 1914. This application was opposed by Abdul Bari Khan, plaintiff 1, in November 1924.

4. The revenue Court however ordered mutation in favour of defendant 1 Nasir Ahmad Khan, on 24th March 1925. Abdul Bari Khan, plaintiff 1, appealed but his appeal was dismissed on 22nd April 1925. He did not have the courage to go to the civil Court, and submitted to the order of mutation, and began to treat Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1, as a cosharer to the extent of half of the entire zamindari property. Nasir Ahmad Khan, defendant 1, filed an application in the revenue Court for partition of h