RAMJILAL Vs. BHONDURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two appeals, one by the plaintiff appellant and the other by the defendants Pannalal and Chhauiram, against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Alwar. The plaintiff's appeal is No. 326 of 1949. They arise out of a suit by the plaintiff Ramjilal against Pannalal and Chhajuram and their father Bhonduram who is the proforma respondent in the defendant's appeal. It was brought on the allegation that a house in Moholla Khapata-pari given in the sketch Ex. P. 1 attached to the plaint was the ancestral house of the parties. In the said house the portion shown in yellow colour was the plaintiff's share & portion in brown colour was of the share of defendants No. 1 to 3. Besides the portion in yellow colour a Kothri No. 1 and the roof No. 2 both shown in red also belonged exclusively to the plaintiff. This Kothri was temporarily given to the defendant No. l. to 3 for use on the occasion of the marriage of Pannalal defendant No. 2. A Poli No. 3 and a Tiwara No. 4 with a Takhat like Silla and a stair case all shown in red colour in sketch were the joint property of the parties. The defendants No. 1 to 3, however, mortgaged with possession all the property shown in the red colour describing it to be their exclusive property in favour of Moolchand and Ram Prasad defendants No. 4 and 5 on 5th August, 1949. The plaintiff, therefore prayed for a declaration that the Poli & Tiwara with Takhat like Silla and the stair case mentioned above was the joint property of the plaintiff and the defendants No 1 to 3. So far as the Kothri No. 1 and the roof No. 2 is concerned he prayed for recovery of possession. As regards all the property in suit he prayed that the mortgage deed dated 5. 8. 40 be declared to be void and ineffective as against the plaintiff.

(2.) THE defendants No. 1 to 3 in their written statement denied that the plaintiff had any right or share in the property in dispute. THEy pleaded that the property was their exclusive property and the mortgage deed of 5. 8. 40 was valid and effective.