UMA PODDAR Vs. JASPAL SINGH CHANDHOK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court This appeal is directed against a decree dated 3rd July, 2014 at the instance of Uma Poddar, Ravi Poddar and Amit Kumar Poddar claiming 212th share in the property in question. The decree directs division of the property in accordance with the shares declared in the said decree as also the entitlement of the plaintiff to 1012th share of the rent collected from the premises. The defendant nos.2 and 3 have preferred a separate appeal.

(2.) The appellant has claimed his right in respect of the property on the basis of same and the similar agreement that was executed by the other co-owners and co-sharers of the property in question in favour of the plaintiff. If the two co-owners andor co-sharers, who executed the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, claim ownership over the structures, the rest of the co-owners being similarly placed cannot be said to having any interest over the structures.

(3.) The tracing of right over the property and structure by the plaintiff as well as the defendant no.1 are on the basis of the same nature of the agreement. The sale deed executed in favour of the appellant by two co-owners of the property results in the appellant acquiring 212th share in the property. The other co- owners on same terms have executed sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. The ownership over the structures by the legal heirs of the Lahiris are accepted by both the appellant and the decree-holder on the basis of the sale deeds executed in their favour.