RAGHUNATH PANDEY Vs. PANMATI KUER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants 1st set appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, III, Siwan, in Title Appeal No. 91 of 1975, whereby the learned Additional District Judge had dismissed the title appeal which had been filed against the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 126 of 1969. by Additional Subordinate Judge, III, Siwan. The Additional Subordinate Judge, III, Siwan, had decreed the Title Suit No. 126 of 1969/19 of 1975, which had been filed by the plaintiffs respondents for partition of her share in the suit property. The plaintiffs had claimed 1/4th share in Schedule I property and half share Schedule II property.

(2.) IN short, the case of the plaintiff respondent is that one Ram Bux Pandey had two sons Ram Tahal Pandey and Mahadeo Pandey and Ram Tahal Pandey had two sons Jugeshwar Pandey and Tapeshwar Pandey who were separate among themselves. Jugeshwar Pandey had three sons Misri Pandey, Sitaram Pandey and Nanhku Pandey out of whom Misri Pandey and Sitaram Pandey died issueless and wife of Nanhku Pandey is defendant no. 8 and his son is defendant no. 7. Tapeshwar Pandey had a son Chhotu Pandey and daughter of Chhotu Pandey is defendant no. 9 and his wife is defendant no. 10. Mahadeo Pandey had two sons Kauleshwar Pandey and Rajbanshi Pandey who had separated among themselves and their share had been defined but the lands were not partitioned by metes and bounds and the land was cultivated jointly. Kauleshwar Pandey had five sons Ramsakal Pandey, Rampravesh Pandey, Jyotish Pandey, Ratan Pandey and Ramjatan Pandey. Jyotish Pandey, Ratan Pandey and Ramjatan Pandey died issueless without their wives. Defendant no. 3 is son of Rampravesh Pandey and defendants 4 and 5 are nephews of defendant no. 3 Raghunath Pandey and sons of Vishwanath Pandey.

(3.) RAJBANSHI Pandey died during survey operation after Khanapuri in the year 1916 -17 and his wife Rampyari Kuer came in possession in his place. Rampyari Kuer was a pardanashin lady and she died leaving behind her daughter who is plaintiff Smt. Pan Kuer and she came in possession over the property of her father and mother. Some lands of Ram Tahal Pandey and Mahadeo Pandey were joint which is mentioned in Schedule l of the plaint and the plaintiff has four annas share in it. The lands which belonged to Mahadeo Pandey has been mentioned in Schedule II of the plaint in which the plaintiff has 8 annas share (half share). Rampyari Kuer was a pardanashin lady and Ramjatan Pandey was looking after her karobar and he used to take the rent from the mother of the plaintiff and to make payment and after her death defendant no. 1 Ramsakal Pandey and defendant no. 2 Rampravesh Pandey used to take the rent from the plaintiff and to make payment of it. There was joint possession of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 6 over the Schedule II land.