PANCHANANA NAIK Vs. BALIARSINGH NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of a suit for partition. Baliarsingh (defendant No. 1) has three sons, namely, Panchanan (plaintiff), Mahadeb (defendant No. 2) and biranchinarayan (defendant No. 3 ). Plaintiff claimed one-fourth share of the immoveable properties and also Jyesthansa of one-tenth of the total property. Defendant No. 1 stated in the written statement that the family had certain loans one-fourth of which was payable by the plaintiff. He also gave a list of the moveables that were in possession of the plaintiff. After deducting one-fourth of the value thereof, he claimed a three-fourth share in the moveables for himself and defendants 2 and 3.

(2.) THE learned Subordinate Judge decreed the plaintiff's suit in part who was given a relief for partition of one-fourth interest in the total property His claim for jyesthansa was rejected. Plaintiff was directed to pay one-fourth of some of the loans accepted by the learned Subordinate Judge and three-fourth of the value of some of the moveables held to be in his possession. Plaintiff is the appellant.

(3.) MR. Rath for the appellant advances two contentions: 1. The claim for Jyesthansa should not have been dismissed; 2. No decree should have been passed against the plaintiff for clearing up one-fourth interest in some of the moveables decreed.