Krushna Behera vs Fakir Mahakud And Anr. on 15 April, 1953
6. The Allahabad High Court however relied on the earlier Bombay and Calcutta decisions, and in -- 'Mohammed Nuh v. Brij Behari Lal', AIR 1924 All 939 (L) it was held that the presumption would not arise when the reversioners who joined in the transfer were ladies or lifeholders. No reason is given for this distinction made in the case of a female reversioner. This case, however, can easily be distinguished on the facts as their Lordships point out that
"the presumption is not strong in the present case because Brij Behari was in existence at the time of the transfer and the daughters of Badam Kunwar were young at the time and capable of bearing children who would ultimately be full owners of the property in suit."