SUBHAN KHAN Vs. LADDAN KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Vinod Swaroop, learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. A suit for injunction was instituted by plaintiff -appellant on the ground that property in dispute is ancestral property and about 30 years back, there was partition among members of the family and disputed premises came to the share of plaintiff and he has raised construction thereon, hence defendants should be restrained from interfering with possession in making construction over the disputed property.

(2.) THE question of partition was specifically disputed by defendants by filing written statement and categorically said that there was no partition at all. The Trial Court after considering circumstantial evidence that brothers are residing in separate houses, recorded finding on presumption considering oral evidence adduced by the parties that there appears to be a partition between the parties. This finding has been reversed by lower Appellate Court.

(3.) THIS Court made specific query from learned counsel for the appellant as to how these documents would be relevant to show that there was a partition. It cannot be doubted that partition, by way of family arrangement, may be entered by members of family orally also. This has been recognized by Court also in Kale & Ors. v. Deputy Director of Consolidation & Ors., : AIR 1976 SC 807, wherein the Court in the context of family settlement, concretized certain proposition and in para 10 of the judgment, said: