KAILASH GIRI Vs. AKHEY GIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two appeals since identical findings arrived at by the learned Additional District Judge No. 6 Jaipur City vide decrees dated January 2, 1981 in Civil Regular first appeals No. 102/80 and 103/80, are under challenge, I propose to decide them by a common order.

(2.) CONTEXTUAL facts depict that Akhey Giri filed suit No. (108/55) on May 27, 1955 against Pratap Giri and Tara Giri for partition claiming 1/3 share in the suit property. After about two years i. e. on March 23, 1957 Tara Giri, the uncle of Akhey Giri, filed another suit (50/1957) against Pratap Giri and Akhey Giri seeking partition and possession of the suit property. Both the suits were consolidated. Learned Additional Civil Judge No. 2, Jaipur City on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed issues, examined witnesses and passed preliminary decree dated June 5, 1971 holding that Akhey Giri and Tara Giri each were entitled to 1/3 share in the suit property shown in the site plan 2 Ka. Suit Property 2 Kha was declared as joint property, whereas suit in regard to suit property 2 Ga, Gha and 5 was dismissed.

(3.) THE law imposes upon the court of appeal the imperative duty and obligation of giving an adequate and satisfactory judgment as is required by law and it is the duty of the Court to explain its reasons for so doing. It is incumbent on the first appellate court, which the final court of fact, while reversing decision to meet the reasonings of the trial court and indicate its own reasons for the conclusion.