DUKHI DIBYA Vs. LANDI DIBYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants have carried this appeal against the preliminary decree passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Purl in a suit for partition.

(2.) Parties are related in the manner indicated below:( Plaintiffs filed the suit for partition of the properties in the hotchpot alleging that there had been no partition among the three branches of which the common ancestors were Bhagaban, Michhu and Hadibandhu. With the aid and assistance of joint family nucleus several acquisitions were made and such properties have also been included in the hotchpot for partition on the footing that they were impressed with joint family character. The kha schedule property represents the moveables while the Ga schedule relates to money-lending business of the family. Plaintiffs averred that they were being deprived of the benefits of the joint family properties and when they demanded partition, the same was not accepted too. Thus the suit was filed in forma pauperis asking for one-third share.

(3.) Bali and Bholi filed a written statement pleading previous partition among the three branches prior to 1927 when the Current Settlement Operations began. The said partition was by metes and bounds; the shares were specifically defined in the record-of-rights and in respect of many items of property specific possession also came to be noted; parties lived in separate houses; were separately assessed to choukidari taxes and have carried on their own business in money lending with separate funds; the several acquisitions have been made in the names of the different members which are not joint family properties. It was also alleged that some of the properties included in the hotchpot belonged to the family deity and were not liable to be divided. Bali and Bholi died during the pendency of the suit but their legal representatives have adopted the written statement filed by the deceased defendants.