PROVAT KUMAR MAJUMDAR Vs. SANTOSH KUMAR MAJUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point that has been argued in this appeal is as to whether the compromise recorded by the court below properly comes under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code.

(2.) The suit in question was a suit for partition. There was originally one Plaintiff in the suit, namely, Santosh who was the elder son of one Radhika Bhusan Mazumdar, deceased. Provat, the other son of Radhika, and the latter's widow Ramrangini, and Govinda, Radhika's youngest brother, and the widow and the sons of Radhika's other brother Gopinath as also Radhika's cousin brother Bibhuti and the widow Kundabala of another cousin Mathura were the original Defendants. Later on, in the course of the suit, Ramrangini was made a co-Plaintiff.

(3.) The suit embraced quite a large number of properties, described in the various schedules to the plaint, namely, Ka to, Gha. Schedule Ka contained the immoveable properties which, according to the plaint case, had been obtained by Radhika. exclusively, during his life time, on an amicable partition (with his co-sharers) of some of the joint properties of the parties. That schedule also contained the moveable properties exclusively belonging, as alleged in the plaint, to Radhika at the time of his death. Schedule Kha comprised; according to the plaint, the joint moveable and immoveable properties of all the parties. For our present purpose, it is not necessary to go into the details of the other schedules.