CHAMPA LAL Vs. BAIJ NATH GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the defendants' second appeal against an order of the Divisional, Commissioner, Kotah, dated 23. 9. 53 a suit for division of a holding.

(2.) ONE Bharmal was recorded as a khatedar of certain lands in villages Kishendas and Vinayka, Tehsil Itava. On the death of Bharmal, his land in village Vinayka measuring 49 bighas 12 biswas was mutated in the name of his son Champa Lal, and his grand sons Baijnath and Gopal, one-third each on 14. 3. 44 through Intkal No. 748. On 5. 7. 52 an application was filed by Baijnath the grand son of Bharmal for the division of the holding in village Vinayka amongst the co-sharers. This was resisted by the appellant Champa Lal, ONE of the objections raised by Champa Lal was that all the lands held by Bharmal had already been partitioned by him in his life time and that the land in dispute which was situated in village Vinayka had been (exclusively allotted to him and that he had been in continuous possession thereof for about the last 15 years, to the exclusion of the other co-shares, It was, therefore, urged that the claim of the respondent for division was not tenable. The trial court framed a number of issues including the one touching this point and after recording evidence of the parties ultimately held that Baijnath was entitled to one-third share of the land in dispute and that the remaining two-third should be equally distributed between Champa Lal and Gopal. On appeal this decision was affirmed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kotah. Hence this second appeal before us.