CHANDRAMOHAN RAMCHANDRA PATIL Vs. BAPU KOYAPPA PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appellants were defendants before the trial Court in suit for partition Instituted in the Court of Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Kagal, District Kolhapur in the State of Maharashtra. The suit filed by the deceased plaintiff (now represented by his legal representatives impleaded as respondents herein) for partition of the erstwhile Watan or Inam lands of his family was dismissed by the trial Court. The First Appellate Court by judgment of reversal decreed the suit of the plaintiff and it has been confirmed by the High Court in second appeal recognising the plaintiffs right of partition of the suit lands to the extent of 1/3 share. The preliminary decree has been framed for passing a final decree and grant of separate possession.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the defendants, assails the decree of partition granted to the plaintiff/respondent but does not dispute the legal position settled by the two Judges Bench decision of this Court in the case of Kalgonda Babgonda Patil vs. Balgonda Kalgonda Patil etc. etc. (AIR 1989 SC 1042) and three Judges Bench decision of this Court in the case of Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil vs. Balwant (1995) 2 SCC 543. In the aforesaid two Judges and three Judges Bench decisions of this Court, it has been held that erstwhile Inam or Watan lands held by the senior most member of the family through lineal descendant on the rule of primogeniture, on abolition of Inamdari or Watandari under the provisions of Bombay Pargana and Kulkarni Watans Abolition Act (60 of 1950) and thereafter by the Bombay Inferior Village Watans Abolition Act, 1958, after re-grant of those categories of land to the Watandar or Inamdar, become partible properties between the members of the family of the Watandar or Inamdar. See the following statement of law in the decision of three Judges Bench in the case of Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil (supra):

(3.) The first ground urged by the learned counsel for the defendants is that the original deceased plaintiff Bapu Koyappa Patil failed to prove his relationship with the main ancestor Suryaji, who was the first Watandar, hence his claim for partition to the extent of 1/3 share was rightly negatived by the trial Court.