9911796707
TMI Blog1904 (5) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... day of February 1856, ordinarily devolved upon a single heir." 2. The property in question was made over by Pirthipal Singh by will (as both the Courts below have held) or by transfer under a family arrangement (as the appellants contend) to his younger son Bisheshar Bakhsh. Bisheshar died in August 1890 intestate, leaving two widows but no male issue. 3. The rival claimants to the property are (1) the son of Bisheshar's elder brother, the eldest male lineal descendant of Pirthipal Singh, who was plaintiff in the suit and is respondent to this appeal, and (2) the two. widows of Bisheshar who are appellants, They were defendants in the suit, and succeeded in the Court of the Subordinate Judge. 4. The sections of the Act which ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate or to a portion thereof if the transferor or testator had died without having made the transfer and intestate, the transferee or legatee and his heirs and legatees shall have the same rights and powers, in regard to the property to which he or they may have become entitled under or by virtue of such transfer or bequest, and shall hold the same subject to the same conditions and to the same rules of succession as the transferor or testator. 15. If any taluqdar or grantee shall heretofore have transferred or bequeathed, or if any tuluqdar or grantee or his heir or legatee shall hereafter transfer or bequeath to any person not being a taluqdar or grantee the whole or any portion of his estate, and such person would not have succeeded, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is that on Bishesbar's death, intestate, he came into the property under Clause 6 of Section 22. The appellants, on the other hand, maintain that Bisheshar was not legatee of Pirthipal Singh within the meaning of that word in the Act of 1869, and that, whether he was not a legatee in the ordinary sense of the word, the case is governed by Section 15 and that, accordingly, on the death of Bisheshar intestate, the property devolved as it would have devolved if Bisheshar had bought it from a person not being a taluqdar or grantee. 7. The learned Counsel for the respondent argued quite correctly that Section 15 must be read in connection with Sections 13 and 14. His contention was that Bisheshar was a person who would have succeeded, wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 13 was introduced by mistake and may be disregarded altogether. On the contrary they think that that clause throws a good deal of light on the words in dispute. A younger son of a taluqdar named in List III or List V is no doubt among the possible heirs of his father but he is not within the prescribed line of succession if the father leaves an eldest son or a male lineal descendant of and eldest son. 10. The construction which commends itself to their Lordships gives a meaning to every part of the sections under consideration. If a transfer or bequest is made to a person in the prescribed line of succession, there is reason for placing the transferee or legatee in the same position with regard to succession to the estate as the tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
