GANGA DEVI Vs. RAM SARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are appeals by special leave. The appellant Ganga Devi is the defendant in both these appeals. The suit was for partition. The genealogy of the family is as under : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_63_2_1973Image1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) THE only contention taken before the Courts below as well as before the High Court was that the suits in question came within the scope of Section 209 of the Act and hence they were barred by limitation under the provision of the Act. THE trial Court as well as the first appellate Court accepted that contention and dismissed the suit but the High Court differing from the view taken by those Courts decreed the plaintiff's suits for partition. THE only question that arises for our decision at present is whether the aforementioned Section 209 as well as Section 210 of the Act are applicable to the facts of the present cases. If they are applicable the suits are admittedly barred by limitation. THE marginal note to Section 209 speaks of ejectment of persons occupying land without title. That note indicates that Section deals with suits for ejectment of trespassers. THE section reads :

(3.) NO other contention was raised before us. In the result, both these appeals fail and they are dismissed with costs. Appeals dismissed.