DEBENDRA Vs. UMAKANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point for consideration in this civil revision is whether lands purchased by co-sharers from other co-sharers should he allotted to their share while passing the final decree in a suit for partition.

(2.) In order to appreciate the facts, it is necessary to produce the admitted genealogy. The plaintiffs obtained a preliminary decree for partition in which the shares of different branches were defined. They filed a petition to make the decree final and stated therein that defendant No. 4, representing a branch having died, her grand-daughter Smt. Chudamani Jena (defendant No. 3 of the final decree petition) sold 1.13 2/3 acres of land out of khata Nos. 94 and 102 of mouzaKumbhari in favour of plaintiffs 1 to 3 and defendant No. 2 by virtue of a sale deed dt. 14-11-1979 and so the aforesaid extent of land should be allotted to their share while passing the final decree.

(3.) Defendants 5 to 10 in their counter stated that Brahma, father-in-law of defendant No. 4 had sold his share of the ancestral land in favour of Rama, father of defendants 5, 6 and 7 and husband of defendant No. 8 and defendants 9 and 10 by virtue of a sale deed dt. 20-6-1932 and so the share of Brahma should be allotted to them in addition to their usual defined shares in the final decree. They disputed that Smt. Chudamani Jena is related to their family and so she had no interest to alienate any land of the share of Brahma in favour of the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2.