JOGINDER BHAGAT Vs. JAI NARAYAN BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-appellants have filed this First Appeal against the Judgment dated 27.02.1987 and the decree following thereupon signed on 24.03.1987 by Sri Subhash Kumar Singh, the learned Subordinate Judge IVth Vaishali at Hajipur dismissing the plaintiff suit for partition.

(2.) The plaintiff-appellants filed the partition suit No.147 of 1983 alleging that both the parties had a common ancestor Raghunandan Bhagat. The said Raghunandan Bhagat had 4 sons, namely, Ram Khelawan Bhagat, Parmeshwar Bhagat, the defendant No.1, Rameshwar Bhagat, the plaintiff No.1 and Gorakh Bhagat, the plaintiff No.2. Ram Khelawan Bhagat died in 1947 leaving behind 2 sons, Brahmdeo Bhagat and Jagdeo Bhagat. The widow of Brahmdeo Bhagat and his two sons Chandrika Bhagat and Surajdeo Bhagat are plaintiff No.3, 4 and 5. The second son of Ram Khelawan Bhagat, namely, Jagdeo Bhagat is plaintiff No.6 and his 4 sons are plaintiff Nos.7 to 10. Parmeshwar Bhagat has two sons, Jai Narayan Bhagat and Vishwanath Prasad Chauhan. Parmeshwar Bhagat is defendant No.1 and his two sons are defendant No.2 and 3. The two sons of Rameshwar Bhagat, namely, Goginder Bhagat and Harinder Bhagat are plaintiff No.11 and 12. The 5 sons of Gorakh Bhagat are plaintiff No. 13 to plaintiff No.17.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, Raghunandan Bhagat died 60 years ago and Ram Khelawan Bhagat died in 1947 and since then defendant No.1, i.e., Parmeshwar Bhagat became the Karta of the joint family. Some of the members of the joint family joined Govt. service and, therefore, although they separated their establishment but the mess and business at Hajipur was joint. For convenience, the parties also separated their cultivation and mess in 1978 but there is no partition by metes and bonds. Defendant No.1, Parmeshwar Bhagat was employee in the Health Deptt. of State Govt. and was posted at Hajipur. The joint family acquired by registered deed of lease Schedule II land on 04.04.1950 out of the joint family income and fund. The family is Mali by caste which is a good source of the joint family income which was used to be deposited with the defendant No.1. Out of the joint family funds, bricks were manufactured and houses, pacca well and temples were constructed. The acquisitions in the family were made by plaintiff No.1, 2 and 6 and the husband of plaintiff No.3 and defendant No.1. Therefore, they each have got 1/5th share in the joint family property acquired after the year 1950 which has been described in detail in Schedule II of the plaint. Each branch of sons of Raghunandan Bhagat has got 1/4th share in the ancestral properties detailed in Schedule I of the plaint. There has been no partition by metes and bonds between the parties. The plaintiffs demanded for partition which was refused. Hence the suit was filed.