GOVIND MANIK FULE Vs. VENKAT MANIK FULE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is preferred by original defendant for challenging the concurrent decree for partition and separate possession passed in favour of respondent nos.1 to 3.

(2.) By judgment and decree dtd. 11/10/2022, learned District Judge, Nilanga dismissed Regular Civil Appeal No.81 of 2013 preferred by the present appellant for challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 2/7/2013 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nilanga in Regular Civil Suit No. 250 of 2010. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 had filed the said suit for partition and separate possession by contending that the suit property was originally owned by their father Manik, hence, they had share in the suit property.

(3.) It is the contention of the plaintiffs that the present appellant, who is defendant no.1 in the suit was acting as Karta of joint family. After death of Manik, names of all the parties were entered as heirs and legal representatives of deceased Manik and name of defendant no.1 was entered as Karta of the joint family in the revenue record. The said mutation entry is produced at Exhibit-55 in the Trial Court. So far as the sale deed with respect to the suit property is concerned, the same was admittedly in the name of deceased Manik and the same was also produced on record at Exhibit-83. It is also not disputed that after the death of Manik, the names of all the heirs and legal representatives were entered in the revenue record and name of defendant no.1 was entered as Karta of the joint family.