S. J. Hyder, J. - (1.)THESE connected appeals are directed against the judgement and decree of the Additional Civil Judge, Azamgarh, dated 22nd of Aug. 1969 passes in original Suit No. 6 of 1964. In order to appreciate the facts of the case, it is necessary to give the following pedigree which is not disputed by the parties :- The family of Baldeo Prasad Athwaria and Mahadeo Prasad Athwaria was a joint Hindu family and was possessed of considerable property. On 16th of May, 1890, Baldeo Prasad Athwaria received a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- from his brother Mahadeo Prasad Athwaria and on receiving the said amount relinquished all his claims in the joint family property possessed by himself and his brother. The relations between the two brothers, however, remained strained and Baldeo Prasad Athwaria filed a suit for cancellation of the document of 16th May, 1890, which effected partition between the two brothers. He was unsuccessful up to the High Court. After the said partition Mahadeo Prasad acquired considerable cash and property by his personal efforts and died on 3rd of June, 1909, as a separated Hindu possessed of great deal of property. He left no male issue at the time of his death. His only heirs were his two widows Smt. Bhagwanta Kunwar and Smt. Basanta Kunwar who only acquired a Hindu widow's estate in the assets of the deceased Mahadeo Prasad. Baldeo Prasad Athwaria also died in 1911. Smt. Bhagwanta Kunwar had no issue. Two daughters were born to Smt. Basanta Kunwar from Mahadeo Prasad and they were Smt. Tulsa Kunwar and Smt. Durga Dei, wife of Hari Chand.
(2.)THE two widows of Mahadeo Prasad came under the influence of Lala Bisheshwar Prasad, son of Baldeo Prasad who looked after them after the demise of their husband. On 31st May, 1924, a document was executed by Smt. Bhagwanta Kunwar and Smt. Basanta Kunwar by which 7 annas of the entire property left by Mahadeo Prasad was given by them to Jamuna Prasad son of Lala Bisheshwar Prasad and the remaining 9 annas share was retained by the two widows. Smt. Durga Dei, daughter of Smt. Basanta Kunwar felt herself aggrieved by transfer made by the widows of Mahadeo Prasad in favour of Jamuna Prasad by means of documents dated 31st May, 1924. She accordingly filed a suit, inter alia, for cancellation of the said document which was decreed. Jamuna Prasad and the two widows of Mahadeo Prasad preferred first Appeal No. 32 of 1927 against the decree of the trial court in the said suit. THE said appeal was dismissed by this court by its judgement dated 15th of June, 1931. Jamuna Prasad and the widows of Mahadeo Prasad then filed an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council which was allowed THEy deposited the security and other expenses for the prosecution of the said appeal within the time prescribed by law and the Privy Council Appeal was numbered as Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1931.
Smt. Durga Dei, however, died on 6-4-1932 leaving behind two sons Radhey Shvam and Sita Ram as her heirs. A compromise was then arrived at between all the heirs of Mahadeo Prasad and Baldeo Prasad on April 21, 1932. The compromise was recorded by this court by its order dated 3rd of Jan. 1933. These facts have not been disputed at the bar.

The main controversy between the parties in these First Appeals is with regard to the interpretation and validity of the compromise dated April 21, 1932. We shall deal with the relevant provisions of compromise at the appropriate stage later in this judgement. It will be in the fiftness of things now to state the facts giving rise to these first appeals.

(3.)THE dispute between the parties relates to one-half share in the Delite Cinema and its appurtenances situate at Mohalla Chowk in the city of Azamgarh.It is again admitted between the parties that the cinema building and its appurtenances had been let out by Smt. Basanta Kunwar, Lala Mukund Lal and Lala Mathura Das to two persons, namely, Shyam Behari Mehra and Nathu Ram Sharma who were the original plaintiffs to the suit out of which these appeals arise. THE rent of the cinema building and its appurtenances agreed between the lessors named above and Shyam Behari Mehra and Nathu Ram Sharma was a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per mensem. Out of this amount, Rs. 500/- per mensem was payable separately to Smt. Basanta Kunwar and the balance of Rs. 500/- to Mukund Lal and Mathura Das. A dispute arose with regard to the share of rent payable to Smt. Basanta Kunwar who died on July 22, 1961. THE other widow of Lata Mahadeo Prasad, namely, Smt. Bhagwanta Kunwar, had predeceased Basanata Kunwar. THE death of Bhagwanta Kunwar occurred some time in 1944. Lalji Maitra who was the original appellant in Civil Appeal No. 342 of 1969 was the real brother of Smt. Basanta Kunwar. He claimed that he was the only heir of Smt. Basanta Kunwar and was entitled to the whole of the rent payable to her. Mukund Lal and Mathura Das, sons of Tulsa Kunwar, also claimed a share out of the rent which was originally payable to Smt. Basanta Kunwar. Similar claims were raised by Smt. Basanta Dei, wife of Radhey Shyam, Ghanshyam Das and Chaturbhuj Das, son of Sita Ram, and Shakuntala Devi, daughter of Radhey Shyam. THE sons of Bisheshwar Prasad and Ishwari Prasad also stated that the said rent was payable to them. Faced with these rival claims, the tenants Shyam Behari Mehra and Nathuram Sharma filed the suit giving rise to these first appeals under O.35 of the C.P.C. THEy impleaded the various claimants who were the heirs of Mahadeo Prasad and Baldeo Prasad and Lalji Maitra, brother of Smt. Basanta Kunwar as defendants in the suit. In response to the notice issued to the respondents five sets of claims were filed before the trial court. As already stated the first claimant was Lalji Maitra who claimed that the entire rent was payable to him. Another claim was filed on behalf of the heirs of Ishwari Prasad and Bisheshwar Prasad sons of Baldeo Prasad. THE third set of claimants were Ghanshyam Das, Chaturbhuj Das and Radhey Shyam. THE last named person died during the pendency of the suit and his widow and daughters were substituted on the record as his heirs. Shankuntala Devi, one of the daughters of Radhey Shyam, filed a separate claim. THE fifth claim was filed by Mukund Lal and Mathura Das. Mukund Lal died during the pendency of the suit and his heirs were brought on the record.
At the first hearing of the suit, the trial court passed an order discharging the original plaintiff Shyam Behari Mehra and Nathu Ram Sharma from all liabilities to the defendants and dismissed them from the suit. After substituting Jamuna Prasad, Dau Dayal and others as plaintiffs the court, proceeded with the trial.