NARAYAN SINGH Vs. ROOPA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal has been filed under Section 96 C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 16.9.1995 passed by Addl. District Judge No. 1, Jodhpur in Civil Original case No. 22/90 whereby the suit for partition of the property and for rendition of accounts has been partly decreed.

(2.) According to the facts of the case, a suit for partition was filed by plaintiff-appellant against his three brothers namely Roopa Ram, Kanhaiya Lal and Champa Lai - respondent Nos.1 to 3 respectively. In the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant, it was specifically submitted that his father late Shri Heeralal was having three properties in Jodhpur city and those three properties were located at Jalap Mohalla, Jodhpur, one house inside Jalori Gate, near Ghanchiyon ki School, Jodhpur and one Plot No. 61 situated at Milkman Colony, Pal Road, Jodhpur. The description of the property was given by the plaintiff-appellant in para No. 2 of the suit, which is as follows:- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_1814_RAJLW2_2010Image1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) In the suit, it is specifically stated that above property No. 1 was ancestral property. The house situated inside Jalori Gate was self acquired property of Late Heeralal and property mentioned at S1. No. 3 situated at Plot No. 61 Milkman Colony, Pal Road, Jodhpur was purchased as per instructions of their father late Shri Heeralal and it is specifically stated that the plaintiff, respondents and their father were living jointly at the relevant time in the year 1958-59 when the said plot was purchased. It is further stated in the suit that all the family members were living jointly with love and affection with respondent No. 1 Roopa Ram- elder brother, therefore, Plot No. 61 situated in Milkman Colony was purchased for joint family in which plaintiff and respondents were having equal share because all the members of the joint family contributed the cost of said plot and amount was deposited in the U.I.T. vide receipt No. 53, Book No. 19713 dated 17.3.1958 though the said property was purchased jointly but receipt was issued by the U.I.T. in the name of respondent No.1 - Rooparam As per the appellant, the cost of plot was paid by all the brothers, therefore, the said property was joint property of all the brothers, therefore, all the sons of Late Shri Heeralal was having equal shares in the said property.