RAMESHKUMAR SARUPCHAND Vs. ANIL ALIAS LEMICHAND HUKUMCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question that has been sought to be raised by Dr. Naik, the learned advocate for the appellants, in this second appeal is that as the original plaintiff Anil alias Lemichand Hukumchand was held to be only a half owner of City Survey No. 847, the Court could not give a declaration to him for the entire property as against the defendants.

(2.) NOW , it requires to be noticed that this point (which is said to be a point of law) has not been taken in the grounds of appeal even indirectly. It is necessary to set out some of the salient facts in order to appreciate this contention.

(3.) THE plaintiff's case was that the property had been built by his grand -father Shri Narayan Bankat Shet of Chalisgaon and that the suit property, i.e. to say, City Survey No. 847 was a part of this property. It is also contended that this property had come to the plaintiff's share on partition. It was further contended that one Ramchand Nyahalchand Shet, who was the nephew of the plaintiff's grand -father Narayan Bankat Shet, had been given permission to use the suit property, i.e. to say, City Survey No. 847 and that was a permissive user.