CHINTAMAN BALKRISHNA GODBOLE Vs. DAMODAR HARI DIXIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that arises for consideration in this Civil Revision Application filed by defendant No. 13 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1264 of 1967 on the file of the Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Pune is whether the trial Court is justified in rejecting his application for filing supplementary written statement.

(2.) THE plaintiff had filed a suit for partition of joint family properties belonging to Dixit family. Though that family possesses lands in Khed Village, in addition to land bearing Survey No. 723, Hissa No. 2 situate at Parvati and House No. 112, Shaniwar Peth, Pune, the plaintiff claimed partition of only Survey No. 723, Hissa No. 2 of Parvati and did not claim any share in the other properties. To that suit were joined the other co-parceners. None of them initially claimed that the lands at Khed were joint family properties liable for partition. Defendant No. 13, therefore, averred in the written statement filed by him that "the members of the Dixit family have already sold their respective shares in the said lands prior to the suit i.e. before a period more than twelve years, and now none from the said joint family of Dixits has got any right, title or interest whatsoever in the said lands." He also claimed that he has acquired adverse possession. He further pleaded in para 3 of that written statement that :---