LAWS(PVC)-1935-3-23

AJIT KUMAR MITRA Vs. SREEMUTY TARUBALA DASI

Decided On March 29, 1935
AJIT KUMAR MITRA Appellant
V/S
SREEMUTY TARUBALA DASI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff's husband Charu Chander Mitter and all the defendants in the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, are lineal descendants of one Guru Charan Mitra. A pedigree setting out their relationship is given in the plaint (paper book page 54). The suit was instituted on March 7, 1928, with regard to certain items of properties specified in three schedules to the plaint, Schedules Ka, Kha and Ga. It was alleged in the plaint that in 1880 the four sons of Guru Charan Mitter, viz., Ishan, Girish, Harish and Mahendra, each of whom had acquired various properties, executed a deed whereby they purported to make certain arrangements for the enjoyment and management of the properties. It was averred that the dispositions of the properties and of their income as provided for in the deed were void and of no effect. It was prayed that the deed be construed and so declared and that the properties in the schedule as also other properties that May be discovered be partitioned, the plaintiff's shares therein being declared. There was also a prayer for accounts. In the alternative and in the event of the deed being found to be valid it was prayed that the defendant No. 1 be removed from his office as manager under the deed on the ground of misfeasance and malfeasance and a scheme of management be framed.

(2.) The Subordinate Judge has made a preliminary decree for partition and has overruled the claim for accounts. Some of the defendants, namely, the representatives of the branches of Girish, Harish and Mahendra, have then preferred this appeal. The plaintiff and the other members of Ishan's branch are the respondents therein.

(3.) The genealogy, at the date of the trial of the suit in the Court below, had undergone drastic changes; defendant No. 1 had died leaving heirs who are now some of the respondents in the appeal; and defendant No. 4 Khokalal had also died leaving an infant Maniklal. Since then there have been other deaths, namely of defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 7.