RAMESH PRASAD PATHAK Vs. AJIT KUMAR PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment and decree dtd. 2/12/2015 passed by the learned City Civil Court, IV Bench, Calcutta in a suit for partition being Title Suit no. 3461 of 2010, whereby rejecting the counter-claim of the defendant, a preliminary decree was passed declaring the plaintiffs to be entitled to 50% share in the suit property, have been impugned in the present appeal. The appeal against the preliminary decree has been registered as FA 112 of 2016 and the appeal against rejection of the counter-claim has been registered as FA 49 of 2023. As both the appeals arise out of the same judgment, the same have been heard analogously.

(2.) Facts spelt out in the plaint, in brief, are that one Mathura Prasad Pathak (in short, Mathura) happened to be sole owner of the suit property. Mathura was issue-less and hence, taking consent of his wife, Ramki Debi (in short, Ramki), Mathura took one Satya Narayan Pandey (in short, Satya) on adoption. By executing one deed of trust dtd. 2/11/1955, Mathura appointed himself to be the trustee of that property and on demise of Mathura and his wife, Satya became the sole trustee as well as the sole and absolute owner of the suit property.

(3.) Satya was blessed with one son, namely, Ramesh Prasad Pathak (in short, Ramesh) and one daughter, namely, Shanti Devi (in short, Shanti), since deceased and Satya himself arranged marriage of his daughter and allotted one room along with bath cum privy etc. in the suit property to his daughter and son-in-law, namely, Krishna Kumar Pandey (in short, Krishna).