RAJIBA KHATOON Vs. RAFIQUL HASSAIN BHUYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application has been filed against the order dated 22.8.94 passed by the Sadar Munsiff No. 1, Dibrugarh, now Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 in title suit No. 48/91.

(2.) A suit was filled by the wife and sons of one Mofizul Hussian Bhuyan against his own brother Rafiqul Hussian Bhuyan as the defendent. Some other persons were made parties, who were the pattadars of the land. The Suit was for declaration, confirmation of possession injection and partition. The prayer made in the suit are partition of property described in schedule D, and partition of the property described in Schedule-B and also pertition of property described in Scheduk-A.

(3.) Schedule-A of the property belonged to one Late Mokbul Hussian Bhuyan and the Schedule-B properties are properties soli by the defendant No. 1 to different persons. Schedule-C are the properties in possession of the parties, that is, defendent No. 1 and the plaintiff and Schedule-D are the properties in joint possession by the defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff and they are claiming same share. The only land which is claimed to be in possession and fell in share of defendant No. 1 is only 4 Bighas -3 Kathas after the sale of 7 Bighas- 3 Kathas-4 Lechas made by him.The written statement was filed by the defendant No. 1 and there the plea of non-joinder of necessary parties was not taken. But during the trial of the suit it was found that these two brothers, that is, Mafizul Hussian Bhuyan and Rafiqul Hussian Bhuyan had five sisters and two sisters came on their own deposed and claimed that the sisters bad also shares in the land. There can not be any dispute that a sister shall have a right to the property left by their father. The learned Munsiff on consideration of the materials on record held that in a partition suit all the co-sharers must be brought before the CourtBut it appeared to the Court from the evidence and other materials that five daughters of late Maqbul Hussian were not impleaded as party in the suit, and it was further found that impleament of five sisters are necessary to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate and settle all the questions involved in the suit. Therefore in exercise of the power Under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, is learned Munsiff ordered to implead all the sisters as party to the suit and the plaintiffs were directed to take necessary steps with regard to that. Hence this revision application.