RAJENDRA NATH DUTTA Vs. SRIMATI BHABINI DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff sued for the partition of certain properties. His case was that the properties in suit belonged to one Srimanta. Srimanta left three sons and three daughters. The sons were Nitai Makhan and Ram Lal. Two of the sons Makhan and Nitai died unmarried after the death of Srimanta. Their mother PraMoyi, therefore, inherited their share of the property. Plaintiff purchased this share from Prasanna Moyi. Plaintiff's case; is that he has in a previous Suit No. 670 of 1916 established his title to these lands and that as he has been dispossessed of some of the lands he has brought this suit for partition. Defendant No. 1 is the widow of Rakhal son of Prem Moyi one of the daughters of Prosanna Moyi. Her case was that plots Nos. 2, 3, 7 and part of plot No. 4 were purchased from Ram Lal the husband of Hira Moni defendant No. 2 and that the plaintiff has no claim to partition.

(2.) The Trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff. He ordered that the title of the plaintiff be declared to a two-thirds share of the land in dispute and that of defendant No. 2 to a one-third share less the lands that had been conveyed by Ex. A which would go to the defendant No. 1.

(3.) On appeal the Appellate Court found that the suit for partition did not lie. That the previous Suit No. 670 of 1916 did not operate as res judicata, that the lands had been amicably partitioned before between the plaintiff and the defendants excluding the lands that were in possession of defendant No. 2 and totally dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.