RAMRUDHAR SINGH Vs. DILESHWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Bench has been constituted to hear this appeal as some important points of law are involved.

(2.) This appeal by defendant No. 1, who was the only contesting defendant in the trial Court, arises out of a suit for partition of some lands situated in villages Tutikel and Sokarla in Ranchi District described in Schedule A and some moveable properties described in Schedule B attached to the plaint. The admitted genealogical table of the family is as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_117_AIR(PAT)_1965Html1.htm</FRM> I may add that Balram Singh left two daughters also. They are Musammat Domni Kuer and Musammat Baidahi Kuer, defendants Nos. 5 and 6, respectively, in this suit. The parties are Bhogtas by caste.

(3.) The plaintiffs case is that the parties are governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, that the suit properties are point ancestral properties, and that Bishambhar and Nilambar separated in status but there was no partition by metes and bounds. The lands described in Schedule A were formerly majhtas and bakasht lands; but, after the zamindari vested, they became raiyati lands of the parties. The plaintiff is entitled to a half share in the Schedules A and B properties on partition.