GOURI BEWA Vs. ARI PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 3 in a suit for partition is the petitioner in this Civil Revision assailing the order of the trial court refusing to correct the decree, as prayed for by her.

(2.) In the plaint, the following genealogy was indicated

(3.) After consideration of the evidence led by the parties, the trial court found defendant No. 1 not to be the son of Arjun, but to be the son of Sripati and one of the brothers of Chhaya. On a confused finding, the trial court in the absence of any dispute about the ancestral character of the disputed properties, considered the question of share of each of the parties. It held that the line of Baban is completely extinct and accordingly, the entire disputed ancestral properties belonged to the branch of Dasa. Dasa had three sons. They are Chaitan, Dama and Sripati. Line of Chaitan became extinct. Thus, the ancestral properties were to be divided half and half between Dama and Sripati. Trial Court categorically found that the disputed properties were divided by metes and bounds between lines of Dama and Sripati half and half. On this finding defendant No. 3, Gouri, the widow of Bhima is to enjoy half of the disputed properties of Dama and plaintiff, defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2 are to get rest half of the disputed properties of Sripati.