DHANUSHRAM Vs. DWARIKA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video conferencing.

(2.) This second appeal preferred by defendants No.1 to 3 / appellants herein was admitted for hearing by formulating the following substantial question of law: -

(3.) The suit property was originally held by Jeedhan Yadu who had inherited the property from his father. He had three sons namely, Dwarika Prasad plaintiff, Dhanushram defendant No.1 and Banshilal defendant No.2 and his widow was impleaded as defendant No.3 in the suit. Dwarika Prasad, one of the sons of Jeedhan Yadu, filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction stating inter alia that the suit property being the ancestral property at the hands of his father, though they are in possession of their respective shares and are in cultivating possession of the suit land separately and also living separately, but it has not been actually partitioned and their mother is living with defendants No.1 and 2, but despite no partition, defendants No.1 and 2 taking advantage of their political influence got their names mutated in the revenue records and order of partition dated 22-7-2004 was passed by the Tahsildar, Simga in which more fertile land and productive land has been kept by defendants No.1 and 2 and less fertile land has been given to him in the partition proceeding and no reasonable opportunity of hearing was accorded to him, as such, the order of partition dated 22-7-2004 deserves to be set-aside and the suit land be partitioned in accordance with law and suitable arrangement be made in respect of the land reserved for defendant No.3.