TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1944 (11) TMI 19
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roperty. The defendant, Mohan Bikram Shah, alias Ram Raja (hereafter referred to as Ram Raja) is admittedly the adopted son of the Rani's late husband, whose name was also Mohan Bikram Shah. As such he would inherit the Rani's stridhan if she was married in one of the approved Hindu forms. The plaintiff, however, alleged that the Rani was bought by her husband for Rs. 25,000 from her father, that the marriage was in the unapproved asura form and that the stridhan would pass to her as the nearest descendant of the Rani's father. As the plaintiff had signed an agreement that the money in deposit should be divided in equal shares between her and Ram Raja, she sought a declaration that this agreement was not binding upon her because its execution was procured "through duress and coercion and show of force and violence." She also claimed damages on the ground that Ram Raja had wrongfully seized the fixed deposit receipts and prevented her from making arrangements for the further payment of interest by the banks. 2. The lower Court found that there had been no gift, that the marriage of the Rani had been in an approved form, that Ram Raja and one of the widows of the Rani&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n important part in this case and I will refer to her hereafter, as the Rajmata. The Rani had gone to England in connexion with her case and Bhagirath had gone with her. After their return Bhagirath was married sometime in 1932 or 1933. The exact date does not appear. The Rani arranged the marriage and paid all the expenses. The allegation of the plaintiff is that there were at that time some sums of money in fixed deposit in various banks in the joint names, respectively of the Rani and the plaintiff, the Rani and the Rajmata and the Rani and Bhagirath, and that the Rani some time after the marriage expressed her intention of making a gift of these sums to-the plaintiff, the Rajmata and Bhagirath. respectively and delivered the fixed deposit receipts to them. They gratefully accepted the gift but, expressing their inability to understand these financial affairs, begged the Rani-to take back the receipts and to continue her management of the money on their behalf. It is presumably implied that the money now in. suit, held under receipts executed in 1936, is the money in deposit in 1932 or 1933 together with any interest which may have accrued upon it and which has not been withdraw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....about 8th February to 14th February when she left (as she said) because her son had had an accident at Jashpur. She has given evidence that the plaintiff and Bhagirath complained to her about the manner in which Ram Raja was treating them. After she left the house she sent a complaint to the Political Agent and eventually returned to Ramnagar about the middle of March and took the plaintiff and Bhagirath away with the assistance of the authorities. A good deal of emphasis was placed upon the conduct of the Rajmata and of Ram Raja in the evidence and arguments, but I do not think that their conduct has much bearing upon the result of the case. The main questions are whether the Rani intended to make a gift and, if she did so, whether the gift was perfected in the manner required by law. There are the following allegations in the plaint about these points: (a) The plaintiff used to make joint deposits in the defendant's Banks under the guidance of the said Rani and in the said deposits the plaintiff's interest was to the extent of one half moiety and the interest of the said Rani was to the extent of the remaining half moiety; (b) On her return from Engl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'99) 23 Bom. 131 and Kalyanasundaram v. Karuppa Mooppanar but I do not think it is necessary to discuss the point at length because it appears that the section which is applicable is Section 130, T.P. Act. There was no deposit of specie. The receipts evidenced merely debts on the part of the Banks. Before the gift either the plaintiff or the Rani would have had an actionable claim to recover the money from the Banks on production of the receipts. If the plaintiff had withdrawn the money the Rani would have had an actionable claim to recover hall: of it from her. After the gift the plaintiff alone would have had a right to recover. The Rani's claim to half would have been transferred to her. Such a transfer could have had no legal effect without the execution of a registered instrument. As no such instrument was executed I should have held that the gift was not perfected even if I had been able to hold on the facts in favour of the plaintiff. As the plaintiff's suit cannot succeed on the basis of the gift, it remains to be considered whether it can succeed on the basis of inheritance. 10. On this part of the case the plaintiff's allegation is that the Rani's m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be regarded as the Rani's son (being adopted by her husband) it is still admitted that the Rani's father left a widow who was surviving at the Rani's death and would be entitled to the Rani's property in preference to the plaintiff. I am satisfied that the plaintiff's case cannot succeed and it is, therefore, not necessary to examine in great detail the question whether the plaintiff is bound by the agreement which she executed on 1st March 1937. In addition to her general allegation that she and her son had been watched and intimidated and that their movements had been confined she made a charge against the defendant that he had threatened her and Bhagirath on two occasions. (Here his Lordship considered the evidence and proceeded.) The defendant was in a position to influence the plaintiff. She had nobody to help and support her except Bhagirath whose assistance was worth very little. The agreement may, in the circumstances, have been a reasonable compromise but I have no hesitation in holding that the plaintiff did not have the independent advice and the independence of action which a pardanashin woman should have before she is bound by a document which she....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entitled to the money. For the purposes of this case, both parties have agreed to proceed on the hypothesis that the half share of these joint deposits was the stridhan of Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi. Defendant 1 Sri 5 Mohan Bikram Shah alias Ram Raja, however, denied that there was any such gift made by Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi and further alleged that there was, in any case, no legal gift in accordance with the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act. The defendant further denied that Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi was married in an unapproved form and urged that even if it be assumed that Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi was married in an unapproved form the plaintiff was not the nearest heir to her stridhan property. Raja Mohan Bikram Shah belonged to the royal family of Nepal. His ancestors had left Nepal and had settled at a place called Ramnagar where they had acquired considerable property and were known as Rajas. We do not know whether any title was conferred on them by the British Government, but popularly they were known as Rajas. Raja Mohan Bikram Shah had three wives but he had no male issue by any of the three. He married as his fourth wife Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi who was the daug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an Bikram Shah died on 18th April 1912. Soon after his death there was a dispute between Ram Raja and Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi and Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi got possession of the estate. Ram Raja filed a suit No. 34 of 1924, against Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi for possession of the entire estate, while Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi filed a suit against him, the suit being suit No. 4 of 1923, claiming a sum of Rs. 17,000 under a lease of the year 1903. The cases were fought up to the Privy Council and the decision of the Privy Council dated 8th May 1931 is printed in our paper book at page 409. Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi succeeded and it was held that she was entitled to the possession of the estate. Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi had lost from the High Court at Patna and she went to England to prosecute her own appeal before the Judicial Committee. She was accompanied there by Bhagirath Mal, son of the plaintiff Maiyan Dalip Rajeshwari Devi, her sister. After her success in the Privy Council she came back to India and took possession of the entire estate and started living at Ramnagar. She had with her sister Maiyan Dalip Rajeshwari Debi who had also become a widow and her son Bhagirath Mal. It is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....safes and the office and issued a proclamation under Section 144, Criminal P.C. permitting access to certain servants and members of the family who were living with Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi to certain parts of the palace and sealed the rest of the palace and directed that no one should enter the same. This order was passed under Section 144, Criminal P.C., (see p. 442 of our record), At the time of Rani Chhatra Kumari's death and at the time when Mr. Bryson was at Ramnagar, Ram Raja had not arrived. At about 5 o'clock in the evening Mr. Bryson left Ramnagar and the funeral procession also left for Benares. The funeral procession had only gone a little distance from the palace when Ram Raja with some of his retainers arrived on the scene. He seems to have immediately taken charge of the affairs and directed that the cremation of the Rani should not take place in Benares but on the banks of a river nearby known as Bagha. The plaintiff alleges that it was the Rani's last wish that she should be cremated in Benares and Ram Raja acted in a very high-handed manner in directing otherwise. On behalf of Ram Raja however it is equally strenuously argued that the Rani had never ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m Muzaffarpur which is as follows: Junior Rajmata, Jaspur State, Jaspur, Maharani Sahiba died on the 31st morning. Ram Raja got possession, come immediately safety for your helpless sister, brother. Maiya Sahiba also seriously ill. These two telegrams are at pp. 446 and 447 of our record. On 4th February 1937 Ram Raja got a list prepared of certain jewelleries and other valuable articles in the palace and in the safe. The details of this list are at pp. 448 to 453. The preparation of this list, it is alleged, was started on 3rd of February and was finished on the 4th. The list was prepared by Raghunath Prasad Pandey, Treasurer Ramnagar Raj, Siddhi Bahadur Mal and Babu Balram Prasad Rai. Bal Ram Prasad was another employee of Ramnagar Raj (see statement of Raghunath Prasad Pandey at pp. 47 and 48). The plaintiff denies that any such list was prepared on 3rd and on 4th February 1937, and the reason for the denial is that in this list it is mentioned that the fixed deposit receipts some of which are now in dispute in this case and the others, we are told, are in dispute in other Courts in India were in the iron safes of Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi. The plaintiff&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her half should go to the person in whose-joint name the receipt stood. According to the defendant, parties then wanted that a lawyer should be approached to make a draft and as there was no lawyer available in Ramnagar, on the morning of the 13th, Bhagirath Mal, Kashi Nath Lal, Private Secretary of Ram Raja and Shatrumardan Sahi, Chairman, District Board, Champaran, a friend of the defendant, went to one Girja Prasad, a lawyer at Motihari who was known to the defendant and who had appeared for him in the litigation of 1924. Girja Prasad is said to have made a draft in Urdu of the agreement and he also made a draft of the letters that were to be sent to the various banks informing them of the said agreement. Having got the draft from Girja Prasad the party left for Ramnagar in the evening. While at Motihari it is said that three stamp papers of Rs. 15 each were purchased by Bhagirath Mal for the agreement to be executed on behalf of himself and his mother, the present plaintiff, and his cousin, Rajmata, while three stamps of the value of Re. l each were sold to Ram Raja through Kashi Nath Lal, his Private Secretary. With the draft and with these stamps and a letter from Girja Prasa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gar with a letter addressed to Ram Raja which is printed at p. 462 of our paper book and is in these terms: My dear brother, Owing to the inconvenience in the course of the journey I had to break my journey at Ranchi and am unable to return at once. I am therefore sending Khan Saheb Gul Mohammad Khan, in whom I have confidence. Please give him a hearing and grant his prayer. Your well wisher R.L.D (Raj Lakshmi Devi) The fact that Gul Mohammad came to Ramnagar with the above letter is not denied by the defendant, but the defendant denies that Marcus Mistry (p. 96) came with Gul Mohammad in the Rani's car. Gul Mohammad went back with a reply from Ram Raja dated 2lst February 1937, which is printed at page 473.. He wrote: My dear sister, Received your letter through Khan Bahadur Gul Mohammd Khan. I am so glad that you had selected such a good man to send your message. I am sorry to hear that you are unwell. Please come and see me as soon as you are well enough to stand the journey and everything will be settled satisfactorily. Please do not worry about Bhagirath and others. They are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the plaintiff as well as by the defendant and was witnessed by Bhagirath Mal, Dr. Janki Charan and Kanchi Maharani. Neither the scribe nor the attesting witnesses has been examined by either party. After the agreement letters were sent under the signature of the plaintiff and the defendant to the banks informing them of the said agreement and the rights of the parties. 22. On or about 5th March, Ram Raja left for Calcutta and he was in Calcutta when on 9th March 1937 Rajmata accompanied by Rama Kant Malaviya, advocate, and certain other people reached Ramnagar. She put up at the Dak bungalow. She complained to Mr. Bryson that certain servants of the Ramnagar State had caused her annoyance, and Mr. Bryson wrote a letter to the Sub-Inspector at Ramnagar to enquire into the matter and see that such objectionable conduct was stopped. He also wrote another letter to the Sub-Inspector in which he mentioned that Bhagirath Mal wanted to leave Ramnagar and go to Jaspur and the Sub-Inspector was to see that no obstruction was caused to Bhagirath Mal leaving Ramnagar and he was further directed to make an inventory of the luggage removed if Bhagirath Mal so desired. Mr. Salisbury, the Dist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Rani wanted to make a. gift it was ineffectual in law and the Rani remained the owner of the property and the property must go to her legal heir on her death. Great reliance has been placed by learned Counsel for the plaintiff on the fact that Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi was admittedly not well disposed towards the defendant and the only persons for whom she had affection were her own relations and she was specially fond of her sister, the present plaintiff, and Bhagirath Mal who was the only son born of any of the three sisters. She had reasons to be specially pleased with them as Bhagirath Mal and the plaintiff stayed all along with Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi from the time that she became a widow and looked after her. It is pointed out that Bhagirath Mal went with the Rani to England when she went there to fight her case before the Privy Council and the plaintiff was also to accompany her as is evident from the fact that a passport was obtained for her but she could not go as she fell ill. It is argued that it was, therefore, very natural that Rani Chhatra Kumari Devi should make a gift of her half share in these fixed deposits. 25. The plaintiff's case about the gift is th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s in whose joint names these deposits stood, but I am not convinced that she ever made any gift in the manner stated by Dam-bar Dwaja Khan or the plaintiff. 26. A question has arisen what would be the appropriate section of the Transfer of Property Act (4 of 1882) applicable to such a gift and how such a gift should be effected under the law. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff has relied on Section 123 which says that for the purpose of making a gift of moveable property, the transfer may be effected either by a registered instrument signed as aforesaid or by delivery. Such delivery may be made in the same way as goods sold may be delivered. He has argued that the handing over of the fixed deposit receipts amounted to a delivery and was sufficient compliance with the provisions of the law. Learned Counsel for the defendant, however, has urged that even if the fixed deposit receipts were handed over to the persons concerned, it would not be sufficient compliance with Section 123 of the Act and according to him so long as the Rani was in a position to withdraw the money from the banks it could not be said that she had made a gift of it. He has, however, argued that the proper secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ain period. There being no instrument in writing in this case it cannot be argued that if Section 130 of the Act was applicable the provisions of that section had been complied with. If Section 123 of the Act was applied, the question would arise whether the handing over of the fixed deposit receipts, if proved, amounted to a delivery. The fixed deposit receipts represented the money in the bank and as they were payable to either or survivor, either of the joint depositors could withdraw the whole amount, but on such withdrawal he would be trustee for the other to the extent of his share. It is argued that in case of a gift and the handing over of the fixed deposit to the donees no such question of trust as regards the half share of the money would arise and therefore it must be deemed that it was a completed gift. In case Section 123 were applicable then the handing over of the fixed deposit receipt may be enough. But to my mind the making of a gift of a fixed deposit in a bank is not the making of a gift of moveable property but is the gift of an actionable claim. I am of the opinion Section 130, T.P. Act, applies and the handing over of the fixed deposit receipt would not be eno....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rried, as already mentioned even prior to 1893, and I find it very difficult to believe that a boy of fourteen or fifteen will be the companion of Puran Chandra at the 'time of the negotiation relating to the marriage and would be his advisor as to what he should do. 29. The other witness produced is Lt. Nar Bahadur Mal (p. 75). He was only fifty-nine at the time when he gave his statement and he was thus even younger than Dambar Dwaja. These are the only two witnesses produced by the plaintiff, besides herself. The plaintiff was cross-examined at length on this part of her statement at p. 125, and I am of opinion that the plaintiff and these two witnesses have entirely failed to prove that the marriage took place in an unapproved form and I have, therefore, no reason to differ from the finding of the lower Court on this point. The defendant produced two witnesses, Sabz Pari (p. 152) and Krishna Badan (p. 154) to swear to the contrary, but I consider that they are very unsatisfactory witnesses and no reliance can be placed on their statement. Even if the marriage was performed in an unapproved form, I do not see how the plaintiff can succeed. The law as regards stridhan succ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sideration of which Puran Chandra Khan agreed to give his daughter in marriage to the Raja. I have already 'held that the evidence produced to prove such an agreement is wholly unsatisfactory and I am not prepared to differ from the Court below on the point. 32. The defendant has relied on an agreement dated 1st March 1937 between the plaintiff and the defendant under which the plaintiff agreed to give up all claim to the half share now in suit and has urged that as a result of that agreement the plaintiff is not entitled to maintain the suit. We understand there is another case pending in Motibari in which this agreement is also in issue. After having held that there was no legal gift in plaintiff's favour it is not necessary for me to record any definite finding on the question of the agreement, but as the matter has been fully argued before us by learned Counsel on both sides, I propose to give my views on the question of the agreement. Great reliance was placed by learned Counsel for the defendant on the absence of Bhagirath Mal from the witness box. He has drawn our attention to the statement of the plaintiff at page 124, lines 10 to 20 and p. 127, lines 19 to 23 wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s regards the exact age of Bhagirath Mal but we have been told from such material, as there is on the record, that he was between the ages of 20 and 23. From what I can find on the record it further appears that Bhagirath Mal was not a young man of any very steady character. In one of his statements he has stated that during this period he was kept drunk day and night. Whether he was kept drunk by the defendant or he drank in the company of the defendant I do not know, but it appears that he was openly with Ram Raja and. surreptitiously at times he was against him. The first thing that we have is an account of a large sum of money of the defendant written by Bhagirath Mal in his own hands (p. 678), and the evidence of Raghunath Prasad treasurer (p. 48,1. 11) and Ram Raja (p. 136, 1. 35) relates to it. Then we have the further fact that it was Bhagirath Mal who on 4th February gave information to Ram Raja that certain blank papers had been obtained by Mahadeo Singh the old Manager of the Rani. Bhagirath Mal handed over the blank sheets with the Rani's thumb impression in his possession and also gave information as regards the other blank sheets which were in the possession of Ma....