TAPAS BISWAS AND ORS. Vs. SUNIL KUMAR BISWAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 100 of the CPC against the reversal finding returned by the judgment dated 09.02.2009, delivered in Title Appeal No. 40/2006 by the Additional District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala Court No. 3. The judgment delivered in the Title Suit (Partition) No. 38/2005 by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Court No. 2, Agartala, West Tripura has been reversed and the suit has been decreed. At the time of admitting the suit the following substantial questions of law were formulated by this Court:

(2.) THE facts that would essentially be required for appreciating the substantial questions of law may be introduced at the beginning. The appellants and the respondents in this appeal are the legal heirs of late Debendra Ch. Biswas. Debendra Ch. Biswas is survived by 4 sons and 2 daughters, namely, Anil Chandra Biswas, the plaintiff and the respondent herein, Kalipada Biswas since deceased, the defendant No. 1 now represented by his legal heirs the appellants No. 1 -a, 1 -b, 1 -c and 1 -d. Shri Sukumar Biswas, the appellant No. 2, Shri Sunil Kumar Biswas, since deceased, now represented by his legal heirs appellants No. 3 -a, 3 -b, 3 -c and 3 -d Smti Charu Bala Biswas, the defendant No. 8 and the appellant No. 8(a) herein and Smti Parul Bala Biswas (Das), the defendant No. 9, the appellant No. 9 herein, Nikhil Biswas since deceased, represented by the legal heris, the appellants No. 4, 5, 6 and 7 and those appellants are the widow and sons of Nikhil Biswas. It is not in -dispute that the suit properties described in the schedule appended to the plaint has never been partitioned amongst the legal heirs of Debendra Chandra Biswas in terms of Hindu Succession Act. However, the plaintiff -respondent has asserted in the plaint that the respondents No. 8 and 9 had relinquished their right, title and interest and demand over any portion of the suit land. In the written statement filed by the appellants herein it has been asserted that a family arrangement was made by late Debendra Chandra Das during his life time amongst his sons and daughters for peaceful transformation. They have asserted categorically as under:

(3.) THE appellant -defendants, has further asserted that the plaintiffs and the defendant Nos. 1 -7 meaning the appellants No. 1 -a to the appellant No. 7 have been possessing the suit land in their respective portions as per distribution and arrangement made by Lt. Debendra Chandra Biswas. However, they have asserted that "..no legal partition have been made amongst the plaintiff and the defendant Nos. 1 -7. The defendant Nos. 1 -7 were ready to make amicable partition of the suit land but the plaintiff though claimed for amicable partition to the defendant Nos. 1 -7 but raised some demand of getting the portion of the land to other defendants in exchange of the portion in his possession of less value, in which the defendants raised objection. The plaintiff cannot legally claim the portion of other defendants in possession in exchange of less valuable land under his possession as per the distribution made by Lt. Debendra Chandra Biswas in his life time. All the defendant Nos. 1 -7 also as per oral distribution and arrangement have been possessing some portion of more value and some portions of less value and hence the plaintiff cannot claim in his share entire valuable portion.." On such assertion it has been denied by the defendants, that ever they resisted amicable partition of the suit land.