(1.) HEARD Counsel appearing for the appellants. While admitting this appeal this Court framed the following substantial question of law :
(2.) THE appellant is the unsuccessful defendant No. 1. The respondent no. 1 is the original plaintiff. The genealogy showing the relationship between the parties is as under :<IMG>np_1198_mhlj4_2005. jpg</IMG>
(3.) THE respondent No. 1 Bhagirathibai came to the Court with a case that her father Tukaram died in or about 1960 i. e. after coming into force of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. She therefore claimed partition and separate possession of her share in the suit property which includes the land and house property.