KALANDI PARIDA Vs. SADHU PARIDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS 1 to 6 are the appellants. The appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The relationship of the parties will appear from the geneology given below :

(2.) IT is the case of the plaintiff that after the death of Gopal Parida, his four sons, viz . Kesari, Narottam, Hari and Bali became separate in status, but did not partition the properties by metes and bounds. Kesari died leaving his widow Padi and his son Aprati. Sometime after Aprati died leaving his widow Neta. After the extinction of the line of Kesari, the other three branches are entitled to get one-third share in the family properties. Narottam as the eldest member and the Karta of the family was looking after the current settlement operations and managed to get recorded his share as six annas in some of the properties, though there was no partition by metes and bounds. Padi the widow of Keshari and Neta the widow of Aprati made some invalid alienations in respect of the properties allotted to Kesari by amicable arrangement. The plaintiff's further case is that some Sikimi land (plot No. 305) purchased by him by a registered sale-deed, Ext. 2, dated 5-11-58 from one Sauti Bastia is his self-acquisition and the same is not liable to partition. He also asserted that the plot No. 306 and 261/824 in Mouza Balapur and the half-constructed pucca house which he built at his own cost thereon may be allotted to his share in the partition.