RAMKALI Vs. JAIKISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiffs' second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Jaikishan (R-1) had a brother Late Manak. Ramkali (A-1) is widow of Manak while Sudha Bai (A-2) and Guddi Bai (A-3) are the daughters of Late Manak and Ramkali Bai (A-1).

(2.) AS per plaint Jaikishan (R-1) and Late Manak had purchased 27.92 acres of land in village Nandpur out of proceeds of sale of their ancestral land at village Kaniwada. It was claimed that Jaikishan (R-1) being the elder brother used to manage the sale of land and some how he got his name entered on 75% share of the land while name of Late Manak was entered only on 25% share, though both the brothers had equal shares in the suit land. It was claimed that after about two years of purchase of land Late Manak and Jaikishan (R-1) started living separate dividing the land and Late Manak got khasra Nos. 194, 196, 197 and 204 area 14.84 acres land in his share. It was also claimed that Umed Singh (R-2) was son of one Smt. Pammo Bai who co-habited with Late Manak for some years and left him and started living with Bhaiyalal of Chandan Pipaliya. It was claimed that Umed Singh (R-2) was born at the house of said Bhaiyalal and was brought up by him and had no relation with Late Manak. It was claimed that after death of Late Manak appellants were in possession of land which was separated from land of Jaikishan (R-1) by medh. However, Jaikishan (R-1) applied for partition in revenue Court and claimed 75% of the share and Jaikishan (R-1) and Umed Singh (R-2) caused interference in possession of appellants in Asadh 84, hence this civil suit for declaration of one half share and injunction against interference in possession.

(3.) THE trial Court held that Jaikishan (R-1) and Late Manak had equal share in the suit lands. Any how appellants and Umed Singh (R-2) have equal shares in land held by Late Manak and thus, the appellants are entitled to two-fifth share in the suit lands and can get divided the lands as per their share. However, no injunction was granted and parties were directed to bear their own costs. The learned first appellate Court on appeal by Jaikishan allowed the appeal and held that the appellants are entitled to one-fifth share of the suit land.