BRAJANANDA PRADHAN Vs. SACHIDANANDA PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant who is the plaintiff in the suit for partition has assailed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional Munsif, Athmallik dismissing the suit which in appeal were confirmed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Angul.

(2.) The plaint reveals the following genealogy and facts:- The parties indisputably have 69.59 acres of land in village Purunamanatri described in greater detail in the plaint schedule which are ancestral joint family property recorded jointly in the names of the appellant and the respondents in the latest settlement record of rights. Each of the branches is entitled to 1/3rd share. There has not so far been a partition by metes and bounds but the parties are in possession according to convenience. The appellant is in possession of lands less than his legitimate share. Therefore, he prayed for a decree for partition of the suit lands by metes and bounds.

(3.) The learned Additional Munsif considered the oral and the documentary evidence particularly an unregistered document suggesting partition (Ext. E) and came to the conclusion that the fathers of the parties being three brothers had completely separated in mess and property. Therefore, he dismissed the suit for partition by metes and bounds. On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge discarded a few documents including Ext. E, but nevertheless came to the conclusion for reasons of his own that there had been an earlier partition and so the appellant could not pray for partition afresh. Therefore, he affirmed the decision of the learned lower court.