T S PRAKASH CHAND GONG Vs. HANSRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit is one for partition.

(2.) The averments made in the plaint in brief, are as follows:

(3.) The first defendant filed a written statement contending that the claim of the plaintiff that he and the first defendant had purchased the property jointly is not correct. According to the first defendant, he paid the major portion of the sale consideration but the sale deed was registered in the joint names. The claim of the plaintiff is that he is in joint possession and enjoyment of the suit property and that they jointly developed the property by putting up construction on the land is denied. The first defendant would further contend that the father of the plaintiff late Tharachand Gong, the father of the first defendant late Inderchand Gong and one Manekchand Gong constituted a Hindu Undivided Family, of which, the father of the plaintiff Tharachand Gong was the Kartha. The father of the first defendant, viz., Inderchand Gong, died in the year 194 On the death of the Inderchand Gong, his son the first defendant had became the member of the Hindu Undivided Family. There was a deed of declaration dated 01.11.1970, which evidenced a partition of the family businesses and retention of the properties of the Hindu Undivided Family as joint family properties.