GOKULABAI RAJARAM PATIL Vs. KANTABAI DAMU PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE original defendant nos.1, 2 and 3 have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Assistant Judge, Satara on 2.8.1983 affirming the judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Karad on 24.3.1981. According to the decree passed by the courts below, the plaintiff Smt. Kantabai (since deceased) and now represented by Shri Sahebrao, has been held entitled to claim 5/8th share in the suit property and defendant nos.1,2 and 4 are entitled to claim 1/8th share.

(2.) THE original plaintiff Smt.Kantabai filed a suit for partition and for separate possession of the property in dispute comprising of agricultural land as well as house property described in the plaint and for separate possession of 2/3rd share in the said property with the future mesne profits. The suit properties are admittedly ancestral properties of Damu Dnyanu, plaintiff's husband who died on 22.6.1940. Damu Dnyanu and original plaintiff Smt. Kanthabai has adopted Rajaram. After the death of Damu in the year 1940 all the properties were held jointly by adopted son Rajaram and original plaintiff. It appears that the dispute arose between the plaintiff Kanthabai and Rajaram after the death of Damu and the original plaintiff was constrained to file a Regular Civil Suit against her son Rajaram for maintenance The said suit was registered as Regular Civil Suit no. 199 of 1946 and in that suit the parties arrived at a compromise and thereby Rajaram agreed to pay regular maintenance to the original plaintiff. Rajaram did not discharge his obligation under the compromise decree by making the payment of maintenance regularly to the original plaintiff Smt. Kantabai. Rajaram died on 9/3/1972 leaving behind the original plaintiff, mother, two wives Smt. Gokulabai and Smt. Subhadrabai and four daughters Malan, Lilabai, Asha and Usha. It appears that after the death of Rajaram his wife Smt Gokulabai and Smt. Subhadrabai and daughters got their names entered to the entire property and denied the share to the original plaintiff. That led to the filing of the present suit by the original plaintiff Smt. Kanthabai against the two wives and four daughters left by Rajaram who were impleaded as defendant nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 respectively.

(3.) THE defendant nos.4 to 6 filed separate written statement and according to them, the original plaintiff had given up her right to claim partition and had only chosen to get maintenance and for that she filed Civil Suit No. 199 of 1946 in which Rajaram agreed to pay maintenance to the original plaintiff and that payment of maintenance was being made regularly.