(1.) THE Second Appeal No. 137 of 2006 has been admitted on the substantial question of law, as mentioned in the ground No. 9 at page -7 of the appeal memo and R. S. A. No. 146 of 2006 has not yet been admitted.
(2.) THE respondent No. 1 Nishamani Sahu, as the plaintiff, filed a suit for partition. The appellant was defendant No.1.
(3.) THE case of the plaintiff is that the defendant No. 1 is her son and the suit land stands recorded in their name along with the house standing thereon which have been let out to defendants 2 and 3 on monthly rent basis. Defendant No.1 being her son, is collecting the rent from the tenants and not giving any amount to her. She is an old ailing lady and, as the defendant No.1 is not willing for partition of the properly, she has come up with the suit for partition.