VIKRMA SINGH Vs. ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant has filed the present civil revision being aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2017 by which, the learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Jaora, District Ratlam has rejected his application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC.

(2.) The respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed the suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction against the present applicant. The plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are real brother and plaintiff No.3 is sister and plaintiff No.4 is their mother. The defendant No.1 is father of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and husband of defendant No.4 and all of them belongs to Hindu religion and governed by Hindu Law.

(3.) The agriculture land of various survey numbers mentioned in para 2 of the plaint is recorded in the name of defendant No.1 being an ancestral property. The applicant/defendant No.1 got the suit properties from his father. According the plaintiffs, the defendant No.1 without partition of the property has sold the land bearing Survey No.255/2 area 0.454 are by registered sale deed to Bhanwarkunwar Bai. The defendant No.1 is having only 1/5th share in entire ancestral property, therefore, they are co-owner of the ancestral property and having 4/5-4/5 share each and entitled to get mutated after the partition and defendant No.1 be restrained to alienate the suit property.