JASODA MOHARANA Vs. SADANANDA MOHARANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -One of the plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 98 of 1986 is in appeal against the judgment'and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge (presently designated as CivilJudge, Senior Division), Dhenkanal, dismissing the suit for partition.

(2.) Plaintiffs are daughters of Sudarsan Moharana. Their case in short, is that their father died in 1975 leaving behind them, their Mother Kokila and brother Sadananda, defendant No. 1. Their mother died in 1980. The suit lands described in schedule-A of the plaint, it is alleged, were the self-acquired property of their father and on his death it devolved upon them and their mother as well as brother Sadananda. It is alleged that defendant No. 1 transferred some of the suit lands to defendants 2 and 3 out of his share. Since there has been no partition of the suit land between, them and defendant No. 1 they requested the matter for amicable partition, but it was not acceded to. Hence the suit.

(3.) Defendants filed joint written statement and contested the suit. They denied the plaintiffs' case'that the suit land was the selfacquired property of their father Sudarsan and asserted that it was part of ancestral property and was being possessed by the joint family consisting of Sudarsan and his son defendant No. 1. Their further case was that Sudarsan while alive lost his vision. So defendant No. 1 became Karta and manager of the joint family and while acting as such, he had incurred some loan from D.l.C. and others for family necessity. Since the 'family had no other source of income, defendant No. 1 in order to pay off the loan sold away the suit property to defendants 2 and 3 and put them in possession. In that view of the matter, when the suit land is no more available to the family the plaintiffs' suit for partition is not maintainable.