LAWS(PAT)-2011-4-340

SURESH SINGH Vs. BHAGWATI DEVI

Decided On April 25, 2011
SURESH SINGH Appellant
V/S
BHAGWATI DEVI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST Appeal No. 597 of 1994 is directed against the Judgment and Preliminary Decree dated 14.6.1994 passed by learned Sub -Judge IVth, Danapur in Title Partition Suit No. 122 of 1983 whereby the plaintiff -respondents suit has been decreed to the extent of half share. The First Appeal No. 133 of 2002 is against the final decree dated 5.2.2002 passed in the said suit.

(2.) THE original plaintiff, Janki Singh filed the aforesaid Partition Suit No. 122 of 1983 claiming half share in the suit property mentioned in detail in Schedules 'I' to 'III' to the plaint. During the pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff Janki Singh died. In his place his legal heirs have been substituted who are the respondents here in the Appeals. The plaintiffs claimed the aforesaid relief of half share in the suit property on the facts that Ganauri Mahto and Nemdhari Mahto of Village Chouragopalpur, P.S. -Bihta, District -Patna were full brothers. Ganauri Mahto had two sons, namely, Jitu Mahto and Jitan Mahto whereas Nemdhari had also two sons, namely, Mital Singh and Ganpath Singh. Ganauri Mahto and Nemdhari Mahto died in the state of jointness. Jitu Mahto and Mital Mahto who are also known as Jitu Singh and Mital Singh died issueless a:1d unmarried in jointness. Jitan Mahto died in the year 1942. leaving behind his widow Rampati Devi and a daughter Parwati Devi. After death of Jitan Mahto in the year 1942, Rampati Devi, his widow owned and possessed the interest of her husband and she became the full owner of half share of her husband after coming into force of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. She remained in joint possession till her death in the year 1970. After her death, the property devolved on her daughter Parwati Devi who came and remained in joint possession till her death on 18.8.1981. After her death, the plaintiff being her son came in joint possession. Parwati Devi, the mother of the plaintiff was married with Raghunandan Singh. The defendant Nos. 1 & 2 are sons of Ganpath Singh and the other defendants are their sons. The plaintiff has got half share in the entire suit property detailed in Schedules I to III of the plaint and there is unity of title and possession over the same.

(3.) THE defendant on being noticed appeared and filed two separate written statements contesting the plaintiff's case. One written statement was filed by the defendant Nos. 1 to 1/C and the other written statement was filed by the other defendants. Their defence is in the same line which may be stated in brief that Jitan Singh @ Mahto also died unmarried and issueless and, therefore, there is no question of Rampati being his wife and Parwati their daughters. Therefore, plaintiff has got no concern with Jitan Singh. On the death of Jitu Singh, Jitan Singh and Mital Singh, the entire suit properties devolved upon these defendants exclusively. These defendants are on inimical terms with one Shivpujan Singh of their village. The plaintiffs have filed the suit at the instigation of said Shivpujan Singh. Raghunandan Singh had purchased Parwati Devi from Janki Bazar, Chhapra and married her and, therefore, Parwati had no concern with Jitan. The defendant has also acquired title by adverse possession by remaining in exclusive possession for more than 12. years. Besides these defence, the defendants also pleaded various ornamental please.