MADAN LAL Vs. NARENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 96 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 22.2.2012 passed by the District Judge, Pratapgarh, whereby the suit filed by the respondent- No.1- plaintiff has been decreed in terms of the compromise and the compromise alongwith map (Ex.-6) has been made a part of the decree.

(2.) The facts in brief may be noticed thus : the respondent No.1-plaintiff filed a suit for partition on 27.9.2001 seeking partition of a house situated at Dhamotar Darwaja, Pratapgarh having shops and room and claimed 1/7th share in the house. The plaintiff impleaded Nanu Ram, his father and four brothers as defendants. During the pendency of the suit Nanu Ram died and his three daughters were taken on record as legal representatives in view of the fact that other legal representatives were already on record of the suit.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants by filing written statement and it was claimed that the nature of the suit property was self acquired in the hands of Nanu ram besides other pleas. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff filed an application seeking amendment of plaint under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC by incorporating one more relief in the relief clause, which pertained to partition of the agriculture land. The application was allowed by the trial court, however, the order passed by the trial court granting amendment of the plaint was questioned before this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7295/2005 and this Court by order dated 13.10.2009 allowed the writ petition and set-aside the order dated 25.10.2005.