This appeal was admitted by this Court on following three grounds, involving substantial questions of law ;

"(A) If the issue regarding partition is not framed whether the Extra Assistant Judge, Parbhani can give a finding that the Defendant has not proved the partition?

(B) The second substantial question of law is that the Plaintiff has to prove his case and if he has not led proper evidence he must fail.

(C) The third substantial questions of law is that if the Defendant proves his agreement and ownership of Peeraji Laxman whether he can take benefit of section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act ?"

2. Heard Shri Deshpande, learned Advocate for the appellant, Shri Agrawal, learned Advocate for respondent I-b and Smt. Jamdade, learned Advocate for respondent 1-c.

3. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 107 of 1996, which was for declaration of ownership with recovery of possession of the suit house. The suit, after recording evidence, was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division on 29-2-1979. The dismissal of the suit was challenged by the plaintiff by filing Regular Civil Appeal No. 40 of 1979, under section 96 read with Order