BHAGWATI PERSHAD Vs. BABU LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises oat of a suit brought by the plaintiff appellant, who is a minor, for partition of property, which he claims to be joint family property, owned by the joint family consisting of himself and the defendants, who are the sons of his uncle, Baldeo Das. The property, the partition of which is sought, consists of an ancestral house situated at Agra and a certain business which was divided into three parte, one being a sloth business, one a business of money lending on pawn of ornaments and the third an ordinary banking and hundi business. There was also a claim in respect to other moveable properties, sash as ornaments, etc.

(2.) The defense of the defendants was that there was to joint family and that so far bask as the year 1885 there had been a complete separation in the time of the plaintiff's father. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff had no title or interest in the ancestral house.

(3.) The Court below held that the separation alleged by the defendants was acrrest; that the family had long been separate; that after that separation there had been a partnership between the plaintiff's father and the defendants father, which partner ship tarried on the sloth business, the pawnbroker's business and the money lending business; that that partnership had some to an end at the latest in 1913, if not in the year 1906; that a suit for accounts, (sic), of any such partnership was barred by limitation. It held that the plaintiff was the owner of a share in the ancestral house, but it dismissed the suit because the plaintiff point- blank and deliberately refused to make the sons of Tika Ram, his other uncle, parties to the suit, they being members of the family which originally owned the house.