RAMANBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL Vs. PARSOTTAMBHAI KUBERBHAI PATEL DECD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is at the instance of unsuccessful defendants in a Suit proceedings for partition and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 8th May, 1998, passed by the 6th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baroda, in Special Civil Suit No. 288 of 1996, by which the Suit filed by the original plaintiffs was allowed, and it was held that the plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 8 and the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 each had 1/10th share with respect to the suit properties as mentioned in the plaint. The learned trial Judge also held that the deed of relinquishment dated 17th September, 1982, Exh.191, executed by the plaintiff No.2 and the defendant Nos. 8 and 9, in favour of the defendant No.1, with respect to one of the suit properties, was void ab -initio, and accordingly, declared the same liable to be cancelled.

(2.) THE appellants herein are the original defendants Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, the respondents Nos. 1 to 8 are the original plaintiffs and the respondents Nos. 9 to 12 are also the original defendants. The case set up by the original plaintiffs in their plaint may be summarized as under : -

(3.) IT is the case of the plaintiffs that there was division of shares so far as the properties situated at village Sundalpura is concerned in the year 1993. The said partition had taken place with the consent of all the parties. At the time of the partition of the lands at village Sundalpura in the year 1993, the defendant No.1 as the head of the Hindu Undivided Family, had proposed that he would divide the other properties situated in Baroda and Surat after some period of time. However, despite requesting the defendant No.1 for effecting partition of the said properties, the defendant No.1 gave no response and sat tight over the matter. The plaintiffs had also requested the defendant No.1 to render accounts of the rent received by him so far as plot No.56 situated in Hari Bhakti Colony, Baroda and plot Nos. 1 and 2 situated in Hari Bhakti Owners Land, Baroda was concerned.