KARTIKESHWAR Vs. GODAVARI BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 04.09.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge, Bemetara, district Bemetara in Civil Suit No. 20A/2012 by which the plaintiffs suit has been decreed.

(2.) Respondent/Plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration, partition and separate possession on pleadings inter alia that the property as described in Schedule A of the plaint, was the ancestral property held by Hagru Ram, grand father of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 6 and father of defendant No.7. It was further pleaded that the defendants 1 to 7 had no other source of income except the agricultural income derived from the ancestral agricultural lands, as mentioned in schedule A of the plaint. Further pleading was that out of the earning from the ancestral agricultural lands of schedule 1, the defendants purchased various properties from time to time which included land purchased, various property plots and constructed house which is described in Schedule B of the plaint. According to the plaint, it was also pleaded that the mother, namely, Khorbahrain of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 6 and wife of Kumbhkaran defendant No.7, had purchased property from the earnings derived from the ancestral lands. Therefore, it was pleaded, that the entire property held by the defendants 1 to 7 though, purchased and recorded in their name, constituted ancestral property and as such, the plaintiff was entitled to 1/8th share of the disputed property shown in schedule A,B & C and accordingly prayed for a decree of partition and separate possession.

(3.) The defendants denied the plaintiffs claim by making specific averrment in the written statement that the defendants 1 to 7 acquired the property from their own earnings. The plaintiffs assertion that apart from the agricultural land shown and described in schedule A was ancestral agricultural land, was specifically denied.