BISWANATH NAYAK Vs. PARBATI BEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 1 to 5 have filed this appeal. Plaintiff-respondents filed the suit for partition of "A" Schedule and "B" Schedule properties. The genealogy is as follows : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_274_CCC2_2001Image1.jpg</IMG> Subsequently, Baiani (original plaintiff No.2) was transposed as defendant No.3

(2.) According to the plaintiff's case, "A" Schedule properties were the ancestral joint family properties of the parties and had been allotted to Bharat Naik in a partition between Bharat and his two brothers. "B" Schedule properties were purchased from out of the income of the joint family lands as well as joint income from the profession of Bharat and his sons who are weavers by caste. Even though there was no partition between Bharat and his sons, different gift deeds in the names of defendants 2 to 5 were obtained from Bharat and such gift deeds being in respect of joint family properties were not binding on the parties.

(3.) Defendants 1 to 7 filed a joint written statement challenging the allegations made in the plaint. It was claimed that "A" Schedule properties were the ancestral as well as separate properties of Bharat and "B" Schedule properties had been purchased by Bharat from out of his own income, as apart from having his profession as a weaver, he was working as a Mechanic and earning some money. It was further claimed that in the year 1948, there was a partition between Bharat and his three sons. Out of 24 'maans' of joint family properties, six 'maans' were allotted to Biswanath (defendant No. 1) and in lieu of the shares of Raghunath and Chakradhar, Bharat had given each of them Rs. 500/-and a Loom and retained possession of 18 maans of land. The gift deeds were validly executed to the knowledge of Chakradhar, but during his life-time, Chakradhar never challenged the validity of the gift deeds and only after death of Chakradhar, a false case has been foisted.