KASHINATH SAH Vs. KAPIL PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 12 who has appeared suo moto.

(2.) The Petitioner assails the order dated 10.6.2009 of the Sub-Judge-IV, Ara, in Execution Case No. 1 of 2008. It directs the Decree Holder-Plaintiff-Petitioner to amend the execution application by deleting Jamima No. (C) of Schedule-I to the plaint.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that T.S. No. 126 of 1989 was filed seeking declaration that the property at Schedule-I of the plaint had been partitioned between him and the Defendant 1st set and 3rd set. Alternatively if the Court finds that partition had not been effected it should do so and carve out the shares. The properties at Schedules-II and III should be partitioned.