Absolute transfer of shebaiti rights upheld where the deed and surrounding arrangement showed valid passage of Pala rights.

An Arpannama was construed, read with the connected lease arrangement, as an absolute transfer of the shebaiti right represented by the Pala, because its recitals and operative covenants showed that the divided rights and duties of shebaitship were made over to the transferee and his successors. A reservation of part of the rent did not negate that transfer. The transfer was also treated as valid against the executant's legal heirs, since transfer of shebaiti rights was permissible where supported by family custom or justified by the deity's benefit, and the materials did not establish any legal bar or absence of necessity. The plaintiff's claim to the transferred right succeeded.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Arpannama effected an absolute transfer of the shebaiti right represented by the Pala; (ii) whether the transfer was valid and operative against the legal heirs of the executant on the facts of the case.

Issue (i): Whether the Arpannama effected an absolute transfer of the shebaiti right represented by the Pala.

Analysis: The document was read as a whole, along with the connected lease arrangement, and its operative covenants and recitals showed that the Pala was made over absolutely to the transferee and his successors. Pala in the context of a family deity denoted the divided rights and duties of shebaitship, not merely a temporary right to perform worship. The reservation of a part of the rent did not negate the transfer of the shebaiti interest.

Conclusion: The Arpannama did transfer the shebaiti right represented by the Pala absolutely.

Issue (ii): Whether the transfer was valid and operative against the legal heirs of the executant on the facts of the case.

Analysis: Transfer of shebaiti rights is permissible where supported by family custom or where justified by the benefit of the deity. On the evidence and recitals, the transfer was made to a co-shebait to secure proper performance of the deity's worship, and the materials did not displace the stated necessity for the arrangement. The existence of contrary legal impediment or want of family custom was not established so as to invalidate the transfer against the heirs.

Conclusion: The transfer was valid and operative against the legal heirs.

Final Conclusion: The decree of the courts below was set aside and the plaintiff's claim to the transferred shebaiti right succeeded.

---