MASTER GAUTAM YADAV Vs. JAGDISH YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question which arises in the instant case is as to whether the suit as framed is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(a) CPC as being without any cause of action. The contention of the learned counsel for the plaintiff is that the suit as framed is maintainable while as this aspect has been contested by the learned counsel for the defendants. Before dealing with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, it may be pertinent here to give a brief background of the case.

(2.) THE plaintiffs/Master Gautam Yadav and his mother Smt.Mamta Yadav have filed a suit against the defendants for partition and mandatory injunction. It has been alleged in the plaint that the plaintiffs are the son and the widow of late Sh.Rakesh Yadav, who was the son of Sh.Jagdish Yadav and Smt.Shanti Devi, defendant Nos.1 & 2 herein respectively. It is alleged that Sh.Jagdish Yadav/Defendant No.1, the grandfather of plaintiff No.1 had inherited the following properties from his father late Sh.Mohan Singh:

(3.) IN para 8 and 9 of the plaint, it has been averred as under: