DURGA NATH PRAMANIK Vs. CHINTAMONI DASSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Harinath and Pranhari were two brothers joint in food, worship and estate, and governed by the Dayabhaga Sohool of Hindu Law. They were joint owners of various immoveable and moveable properties and had an ancestral money-lending business at Nattore. Harinath died first and the defendant Durganath is his only son. Durganath remained joint with his uncle Pranhari. The latter died on the 8 December 1901 sonless, leaving him surviving his widow, the plaintiff, and his nephew, the defendant. Under the Dayabhaga School of Law the widow succeeded as his sole heiress and legal representative.

(2.) Shortly after the death of Pranhari there was a dispute between the parties with reference to an application to collect the debts due in respect of his share of the family property. This was in February 1902, and it was followed by the present suit for partition which was instituted on the 29 May 1902.

(3.) The plaintiff originally claimed partition of some of the family properties excluding the properties in Districts other than Rajshahi. The defendant objected to the claim for partial partition. On the 16 February 1903, the Subordinate Judge held that a suit for partial partition was not maintainable. The plaintiff then applied for amendment of the plaint by inclusion of the properties originally excluded, and the amendment was allowed.