ORDER

C.A. No. 4171 of 2006 @ S.L.P. (C) No. 15677 of 2004:

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. A suit was filed before the Sub-Divisional Officer by the respondents for partition of suit properties claiming two-third share therein. In the plaint, it was plaintiffs clear-cut case that the partition suit was filed for partition of notional share of Nagar Mal. Undisputedly, the suit properties were ancestral one in the hands of Nagar Mal, who adopted one Nemi Chand as his son, and after adoption both of them constituted a Mitakshara coparcenary under Hindu Law. Further it was undisputed that Nagar Mal died in the year 1989 intestate in the state of jointness with his adopted son leaving behind him, his adopted son Nemi Chand and the plaintiffs, who were his two daughters.

4. The trial court by misconstruing the provisions of law, passed an ex-parte decree for partition of one-third share of each one of the plaintiffs instead of one-sixth share. Against the decree of trial Court, when the matter was taken in appeal, the appellate authority reversed the same after recording a finding that the property was ancestral one, but remitted the matter as the decree was pass