JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. SATYA NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 2 has preferred an appeal under Order XLIII, Rule 1 (d) of the Civil P. C. against an order dated 7th July, 1973, passed by the Subordinate Judge, Sasaram.

(2.) In the present case the plaintiffs filed a suit for partitioning the suit properties. Plaintiff No. 1 and his sons claimed one-fifth share in the suit properties. Ram Prasad Seth (defendant No. 1) had three sons, namely, plaintiff No. 1 and defendants Nos. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 7 was the wife of defendant No. 1 and mother of plaintiff No. 1 and defendants 2 and 3. It appears from the order sheet dated 11th Apr. 1969 of the trial Judge that summons and notices were served in respect of the suit on the defendants. It also appears from the order sheet dated 28th Jan. 1969, that defendant No. 1 (the father) and defendant No. 7 (the mother of plaintiff No. 1 and defendants 2 and 3) appeared through Shri Janki Raman Sharma, Advocate. In spite of service of summons defendant No. 2 did not appear to prosecute the suit. The suit was heard ex parte on 20th. Nov. 1969. PW Sardar Satya Narain Singh was examined. He heard argument of the plaintiffs on 20th Nov. 1969, and directed to put up the case for orders on 21st Nov. 1969. On 21st Nov. 1969, the ex parte decree was passed.

(3.) It appears from the order dated 21st Nov. 1969,. that Ham Prasad Seth had-three sons, namely, the plaintiff No. 1 and defendants 2 and 3. It is for this reason that the court granted one-fifth share to plaintiff No. 1, one-fifth share to defendant No. 1 (father), one-fifth share to defendant No. 2 (son of Ram Prasad Seth), one-fifth share to defendant No. 3 (another son of Ram Prasad Seth) and one-fifth share to defendant No. 7 (wife of defednant No. 1 and mother of plaintiff No. 1 and defendants 2 and 3). In my opinion, the judgment is perfectly all right and in accordance with law.