POPAT BHIMAJI SANDBHOR Vs. RAMBHAU DAGADU SANDBHOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The source of Second Appeal No. 149/1985 is the judgment and order dated 19th January 1985 passed by the Third Additional District Judge. Pune in Civil Appeal No. 555 of 1983 confirming the judgment and decree dated 31st March 1983 passed by the Civil Judge. Junior Division, Khed in Civil Suit No. 126 of 1973, whereby the suit for partition and possession was decreed.

(2.) The original respondent/plaintiff (since deceased), who is now represented by his legal heirs had filed suit for partition and possession of share in suit properties amongst others bearing survey Nos. 609/4, 609/8, 609/ 11. 609/12, 613/2, 1135/6 (?rd portion), 1135/ 9, 1135/17 more particularly described in Schedule 'A' appended to the plaint.

(3.) On being summoned, the appellants/original defendants appeared in the suit and filed their written statement disputing that the suit properties shown in Schedule 'A', were joint family properties. The defence of the defendants was that defendant No. 1 had acquired these properties as a tenant and were in his possession as such to the exclusion of the original plaintiff and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and, therefore they were not liable to be partitioned. Similarly. with respect to land survey No. 672/2, the defence was that the possession of defendant No. 1 Balkrishna Narayan was in his individual capacity as a tenant. Consequently, joint family had no concern with the suit lands. A further case sought to be made out was that the price of the lands was fixed treating it as tenanted property, as such defendant No. 1 alone was the owner of the suit lands. The joint family had no concern with these landed properties. As such the said suit property was also not available for partition.