BANKEY BEHARI LAL Vs. BRIJ BEHARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for partition of joint family property in which the appellant was the plaintiff. The relationship of the parties is shown by the following pedigree: (For pedigree see p. 171)

(2.) The plaintiff's case was that, on the death of Bhagwan Das the family estate belonged by right of survivorship, to the rest of the family consisting of the parties to the suit and that in the case of partition the plaintiff's share was one-half. The plaintiff accordingly claimed separation by metes and bounds of his one-half share. The defence was that the plaintiff had separated himself from the rest of the family during the lifetime of Bhagwan Das and that he was allotted a quarter share only to which alone he was entitled.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge has held that the defendant's case was partially true that although no partition by metes and bounds took place, as alleged by the defendants, there was nevertheless enough evidence to show that the status of the family had been split up and that the plaintiff had come to be regarded as the owner of a quarter share. The learned Judge accordingly decreed the suit by directing a partition of a quarter share to the plaintiff. The main question for determination in this appeal is whether or not there was an actual disruption of the family by the separation of the plaintiff before the death of Bhagwan Das or whether at the date of the suit the family still continued to be joint in which event the plaintiff's share would be one-half.