https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292424 Reversioners were held entitled to sue for possession on the widow's death, and the plaint was not invalid merely because verification was defective; the omission was a curable irregularity, so the suit was not barred by limitation. Prior arbitration proceedings and decree, treated as bona fide representative litigation, operated as res judicata against defendants claiming through Ram Prasad, and the adoption was also found proved. Purchasers from Ram Prasad who bought bona fide, for value, after due enquiry were protected under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, but a transferee from the widow could not claim that protection because her possession did not make her an ostensible owner for that purpose. en-us Fri, 14 Mar 1924 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Dec 2020 11:21:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292424 Reversioners were held entitled to sue for possession on the widow's death, and the plaint was not invalid merely because verification was defective; the omission was a curable irregularity, so the suit was not barred by limitation. Prior arbitration proceedings and decree, treated as bona fide representative litigation, operated as res judicata against defendants claiming through Ram Prasad, and the adoption was also found proved. Purchasers from Ram Prasad who bought bona fide, for value, after due enquiry were protected under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, but a transferee from the widow could not claim that protection because her possession did not make her an ostensible owner for that purpose. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Mar 1924 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292424