SONIYA BAI Vs. PRADEEP KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Review Petition has been preferred by the defendants under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of CPC, questioning the legality and propriety of the order dated 05. 07. 2017 passed by this Court in S. A. No. 617/2016 on the basis of the observation made by the Supreme Court vide order dated 05. 01. 2018 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 38076/2017 which reads as under:-

(2.) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff (Pradeep Kumar) instituted a suit claiming declaration of title, injunction, partition and for the separate possession claiming one-third share with regard to the property in question held by his father Pati Ram, as he is a son born from his third wife Shanti Bai. The suit was contested mainly on the ground that he (Pradeep Kumar) is not the son of said Pati Ram, therefore, he is not entitled to claim any share.

(3.) Based upon the aforesaid pleadings, Issue No. 1 was framed by the trial Court, as to, whether plaintiff (Pradeep Kumar) was born out of the wed-lock of said Pati Ram and Shanti Bai or not and, the Issue No. 2 was framed, as to, whether he was entitled to claim his share with regard to the property of said Pati Ram?