(1) MADHUSUDAN Panda, the husband of the appellant, Dhaneshwar Panda and Trinadha Panda are the real brothers and sons of Sivarama Panda. All three brothers are members of Hindu joint family. The husband of the appellant filed a suit for partition and possession of one-third share in the joint family property. A written statement was filed by the defendants-respondents wherein it was alleged that Madhusudan Panda, by virtue of Ex.B/1, had relinquished his share in the property and, therefore, he is not entitled to any share in the property. Alternatively, it was also pleaded that the defendants have acquired title by adverse possession. The trial court found Ex. B/1 as not proved and further the defendants and plaintiffs being co-owners of the prop- erty, the question of adverse possession does not arise. Consequently, the suit was decreed. First appeal was preferred against the said judgment and was dismissed. However, second appeal was allowed by the High Court and the suit was decreed. The High Court held that Ex.B/1 was not proved. Even after holding so, the High Court held that since the defendants acted upon Ex B.1, therefore, they acquired title by adverse possession