1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The defence was that many years ago one Khurshed Jahan, through whom the plaintiffs claim, compromised certain disputes by abandoning not only all rights which were then vested in her, but also the possibility of her succeeding to shares as one of the heirs of her mother. There is no doubt that a suit was compromised by the lady upon these terms and that the compromise was acted upon, an arbitration held and the award incorporated into a decree in accordance with the award.
2. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that under the provisions of Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, it is impossible for any person tc transfer the chance of becoming entitled to a share in the property of a living person. This no doubt is quite correct, but it seems to us that there is nothing illegal in a person, for good consideration contracting not to claim in the event of his becoming entitled on the decease of a living person. This is in reality the substance of what happened in the year 1868. We accordingly agree with the view taken by the Court below and dismiss the appeal with costs.
V.B/R.K
3. Appeal dismissed.
Comments