MAHAMAYA SAMAL Vs. DROUPADI SAMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiffs challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Talcher in Title Suit No.6 of 1983.

(2.) THE properties described in the schedule of the plaint are ancestral properties of the parties and Krutibas Fatesingh, the common ancestor was the owner of these properties, Krutibas died leaving behind his three sons -Gouranga, Kalandi and Madhu. Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 represent the branch of Gouranga, defendant Nos. 7 and 8 represent branch of Madhu and the plaintiffs, defendant Nos. 5 and 6 and Braja, (who died unmarried and issuless) represent the branch of Kalandi.

(3.) THE case of the plaintiff -appellants is that Iswar was the adopted son of Kalandi and Gokulananda, the husband of plaintiff No.1 and father of plaintiff No.2, Braja and defendant Nos. 5 and 6 were the children of Iswar and his wife -Subarna. Gouranga, Kalandi and Madhu had not effected any partition but were in enjoyment of specific parcel of the suit properties by mutual arrangement and on their, death the respective branches continues enjoying those properties separately. While enjoying those properties separately, members of the each branch disposed of some properties and there is no grievance of any of the parties with respect to those alienations.