CHHOTELAL BABULAL Vs. PREMLAL GIRDHARILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs Chhotelal and Bhuresingh (brothers) have preferred this appeal from the judgment and decree by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, dated 16th February 1970 whereby the plaintiffs' suit for partition and possession of the house in question bearing No. 1130/2, Gorakhpur, Jabalpur, was dismissed.

(2.) THE following pedigree of the parties may be helpful in understanding the facts of the case :

(3.) THE suit was resisted by all the defendants except defendant No. 5 who was proceeded against ex parte. They pleaded that the suit property had been partitioned as far back as in the year 1933 when the parties had separated and the house in question had fallen exclusively to the share of defendant No. 1 Premlal. In the alternative, it was pleaded that the defendants had perfected their title to the suit property by adverse possession. Defendants Nos. 2 and 4 further pleaded that they had invested large sums of money in the property in question as bona fide purchasers for value and in case the plaintiffs' suit is decreed, they should be held entitled to get that amount. The learned trial Court framed a number of issues on the various contentions raised by the parties. After scrutinizing the evidence produced by them, it came to the conclusion that the partition of the suit property in the year 1933 was not proved. All other points except the question of ouster and adverse possession were also decided in favour of the plaintiffs; but, as regards the question of adverse possession and ouster, the learned trial Court found that there was ouster of the plaintiffs from the suit property in the year 1943 -44 and since then Girdharilal and Premlal had been in exclusive possession of the property. In support of its conclusion, it referred to a number of circumstances to which we shall presently refer.