JUDGMENT R.N. Gurtu, J. - The last male owner of these fixed rate tenancy plots in suit was one Raghunath. He died leaving a widow, Smt. Mangari. She executed a deed of gift in respect of these plots in favour of Ram Surjan. Ram Surjan is alleged to be the son of Mangari by a collateral, Daulat, whom she is said to have married after the death of Raghunath under a custom prevailing in the community. 2. The present suit was filed by Ram Lal as a reversioner's suit for a declaration himself and for Plaintiff No. 2 as also for Defendants Nos. 3, and 5. A declaration was sought that the deed of gift in respect of these fixed rate tenancy plots executed by Smt. Mangari, who is Defendant No. 2, in favour of Ram Surjan, Defendant No. 1, would not be binding, after Smt. Mangari's lifetime, on the reversioners. 3. The suit was defended. The trial court dismissed the suit. 4. There was an appeal to the court below which was also dismissed. The court below dismissed the appeal upon the ground that Gajju, the father of Ram Lal Plaintiff, had entered(sic) into a settlement with Smt. Mangari, the widow, whereby he had got half the plots owned by Raghunath and Smt. Mangari got the other half and that Ram Lal, upon the death of Gajju, was in enjoyment of the plots allotted to Gajju and consequently Ram Lal was estopped from challenging the deed of gift executed by Smt. Mangari of the plots which were allotted to her, while he himself continued to enjoy the plots which were allotted to Gajju, his father. 5. The present second appeal has been preferred by Ram Lal and the other reversioners. In view of what follows it has to be dismissed. Since the filing of this appeal, the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 has come into force and widows who under the Hindu Law, hitherto(sic) had a widow's estate, have now been given a full estate and their estate has been enlarged and made absolute and is now an estate of like nature as the estate of a male owner. (See S. 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956). (See S. 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956). The succession to fixed rate tenancy holdings in laid down by S. 34 of the UP Tenancy Act which runs as follows: When a permanent tenure holder, a fixed rate tenant, an occupancy or an ex-proprietary tenant in Oudh or a tenant holding on special terms in Oudh, dies, the interest in his holding shall devolve in accordance with personal law to which the deceased was subject. 6. Inasmuch as under the Tenancy Act, succession to fixed rate tenancies, unlike other types of tenancies, is governed by the personal law applicable to the parties-in this case the Hindu Law-therefore, the rights relating to fixed rate tenancies must now be governed in accordance with the Hindu Succession, Act, 1956 That Act, as already indicated enlarges the estates of widows. Therefore, the estate of Smt. Mangari in the fixed rate tenancy holdings in suit must be deemed to have been enlarged and becomes absolute. That being so, the deed of gift executed by her cannot now be set aside at the instance of the erstwhile reversioners, as an alienation by a limited owner, and the declaration sought by the Plaintiffs cannot be given. The rights hitherto enjoyed by reversioners no longer subsist for there can be no reversionary rights now as previously enjoyed under the Hindu Law. On the death of the widow, Smt. Mangari, her heirs would succeed and not her husband's heirs. The husband's heirs can no longer be considered to be reversioners in view of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 7. For the reasons recorded above, this appeal fails and is dismissed. The costs of this appeal shall, in the circumstances, be borne by the parties. 8. Leave to file a special appeal is asked for and is granted.