PANO DEVI Vs. ISHWAR MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 13/12/1977 and the decree signed on 4.1.1978 by Sri B.B. Prasad, the learned Sub Judge, Biharsarif in Title Suit No. 151 of 1971 decreeing ex parte the interveners-defendants transposed as plaintiffs? suit for partition.

(2.) It appears that the original plaintiff, who is one of the appellants in this appeal, filed the said partition suit against the original defendants, some of them are appellants in this appeal. The defendants appeared and thereafter a compromise application was filed jointly by the plaintiffs and the defendants. The interveners filed Mungeshwar Sahoo, J. an application for being added as party in the partition suit which was rejected by the trial court. Against the said rejection order revision application was field before this Court which was allowed. Thereafter the interveners filed an application for being transposed as plaintiffs before the trial court which was allowed and then the suit has been decreed ex parte.

(3.) The original plaintiff Binda Devi filed the aforesaid partition suit alleging that one Umrao Mahto had five sons namely Ganpat Mahto, Ram Saran Mahto, Lal Chandra Mahto, Fakira Mahto and Somar Mahto. Out of them Somar Mahto died issueless in the state of jointness. Fakira Mahto separated himself from the other three brothers after taking his 1/4th share. The other three brothers remained joint. The further case is that Ganpat Mahto died in 1932 before coming into force of the Hindu Woman Right to Property Act, 1937 and, therefore, the remaining two brothers namely Ram Saran and Lal Chandra only remained in possession of the suit property. The second son Ram Saran Mahto had three sons namely Damodar Prasad, Ambika Prasad and Kapil Deo Prasad. The original plaintiff Binda Devi is the daughter of Ambika Prasad. On the death of Ganpat Mahto his share devolved on the heirs of other two brothers by law of survivorship. His widow was entitled only for maintenance. His wife also died 26-27 years ago. The defendants represent the branch of Lal Chandra Mahto.