JUDGMENT: This appeal raises a short question relating to the interpretation of a preliminary decree which was passed in Suit No. 36 of 1940. That suit was brought by some sons against their father and his alienee. The suit was for partition and separate possession of the shares of the sons in the joint family properties. A preliminary decree was passed on 22-12-1941 inter alia, that .. decree directed that the sons shall obtain future mesne profits from the date of the suit till delivery of possession. The direction was given against the alienees of the father. The alienees were defendants Nos. 1 and 2. They are now represented by a Receiver appointed in another litigation. The decree was assigned by the sons to one Radhakisan who is respondent No. 4. He filed a darkhast No. 1135 of 1943 for partition of the properties in accordance with the directions given in the preliminary decree. It is not disputed that he got on 10-9-1951 actual possession of the properties allotted to the shares of the sons. Thereafter, respondent No. 4 filed an application on 4-12-1953 for ascertainment of the mesne profits in respect of the properties allotted to the shares of he sons from the date of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document