KHAIRRUNISA HAJI Vs. AFZAL HAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Suit is for partition between the two branches emanating from a common ancester. One branch is of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 7. The other branch is of defendant Nos. 8 to 17. The Suit for partition was filed. Both the branches are equally entitled to the suit property. The suit property is essentially an immovable property. The relief in the Suit is with regard to that immovable property. The immovable property is a building consisting of 6 flats, 1 garage and 1 ground- floor portion. The Plaint was stated to have been served upon all the parties. The Notice of Motion for interim reliefs came up before the Court. The admission of the parties of the 1/2 share of the two branches came to be seen. The relief prayed for in the Notice of Motion was seen not required to be granted. The Suit itself was required to be disposed of upon admission of the parties of their equal shares in the suit premises, it being a partition Suit. An order came to be passed partitioning the suit property equally between the two branches. The relief against defendant Nos. 18 and 19, who are third parties, was not pressed.

(2.) The defendants were ostensibly being represented by defendant No. 9 who was present in Court at the time the parties were heard and the order was passed on 23-9-2008.

(3.) It is this order that defendant No. 8 has challenged in this Notice of Motion to set aside on the ground that defendant No. 8 was not served. No other .defendants from the branch consisting of defendant Nos. 8 to 17 has taken exception to the order of partition.