SHEEMA ALI KHAN, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, this appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

2. The appeal arises out of an order, dated 29.9.2008 passed in Title Suit No. 80 of 2008 by which the Court below has appointed Shri Binod Singh, Advocate as a receiver of the disputed lands. The genealogical table will explain the relationship between the parties.

3. The plaintiffs are claiming partition with respect to 2/3rd share of the lands described in schedule-l of the plaint. Scheduie-I lands are the ancestral lands of the parties to the suit; whereas Schedule-ll lands have been acquired by the plaintiffs and defendants from the common pool of the joint family funds.

4. The case of the defendants, on the other hand, is that there was an oral partition in the family and each of the party have been allocated shares over the suit lands which are in their respective possession. The defendants also claim that the suit would fail on the ground that notice has not been served on one of the heirs of one branch of the family and the plaintiffs have also failed to implead the granddaughter of Sarju Rai in the suit as a party. The defendants also claim that