CHRISTOPHAR ORAM Vs. JULIAS ORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Sundargarh (now Civil Judge,Senior Division) in T.S. No. 34 of 1977 decreeing the plaintiffs suit for partition.

(2.) THE plaintiff respondents have, inter alia, pleaded that their predecessor in interest, namely, Sukra Oram, had acquired some lands before the Mukherjee Settlement. After the death of Sukra Oram there was an amicable settlement among his four sons namely, Pujar Oram (appellants branch) Bhamba Oram, Karma Oram and Chamar Oram (plaintiff respondents branch). In the said partition Pujar Oram and Chamar Oram decided to live jointly whereas the other two brothers, namely, Bhamba Oram and Karma Oram decided to live in joint mess and property. The lands covered in Khata No. 48 were alleged to have been cultivated jointly by Pujar Oram and Chamar Oram but few years after due to financial strengency Chamar Oram went to Assansol and also to Assam for his livelihood. It is further pleaded that Chamar Oram used to send money to his brother from which the lands under Khata No. 48 were considerably improved. After Chamar Oram returned from Assam he and his brother Pujar Oram continued in joint mess and stayed as before. But within a year or so, there was family dissension and unhappiness whereafter Chamar Oram decided to live in separate mess, but the appellants' branch used to give some paddy for the maintenance of his family. The appellants' predecessor in interest, Pujar Oram, taking pity on the financial condition of Chamar Oram allowed to cultivate 0.03 acres of land. During the last settlement the properties covered under Schedules 'A' to 'C' were however recorded in the name of defendants separately notwithstanding objection raised by the plaintiffs. Therefore, the plaintiffs filed the suit for partition, separate possession and allotment of their share.

(3.) LEARNED trial court on the basis of evidence placed before it held that the properties belonged to Sukra Oram had been divided into two equal parts and one such part was given to plaintiffs and the defendants' branch whereas the other was given to Bhamba Oram and Karma Oram. After such division. Pujar Oram and Chamar Oram continued to possess the land in tenancy in common. Accordingly the properties covered under Schedule 'A' was recorded jointly in their favour. The learned Subordinate Judge also held that in the previous Mukherjee Settlement the lands covered under Khata No. 48 were jointly recorded in the name of the plaintiffs and defendants' branch. Similarly, the lands covered under Khata No. 67 were recorded in the name of other two branches Karma and Bhamba. The R.O.R. of those lands have been marked as Exts. 1 and 4. The trial Court has further observed that even assuming that the lands were purchased by Pujar Oram from Gangu in the State of jointness and Pujar Oram having thrown such property to the common stock and it was accordingly blended along with other properties of the joint family, the plaintiffs' right for partition cannot, however be thwarted.