( 1 ) IN a suit for partition bearing Civil Suit No. 23 of 1964 the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Junagadh by his judgment and order dated 28-2-1966 passed preliminary decree in terms of following order :-"it is hereby declared, ordered and decreed that the below mentioned properties are liable to be partitioned between the parties and the plaintiffs get 11/20 share in those properties and the rest go to the defendants : (1) Three houses mentioned and described at item Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the list attached with the plaint; (2) One piece of agricultural land admeasuring 1 and 1/2 Bighas and described at item No. 4 of the aforesaid list; (3) The surplus amount, if any, from Rs. 3,000. 00 the sale proceeds of the agricultural land sold by the defendant No. 1 and mentioned at item No. 5 of the list, after taking accounts of the same from him; (4) The movable properties stated and described in the inventory, Ex. 129 and the household kit and domestic articles in custody and possession of the plaintiff; (5) The Yajmans as referred to in the Yajmanvriti books of the family of the parties; (6) The surplus amount, if any, from the sale proceeds Rs. 2,200. 00 of cattle sold by the defendant No. 1 and mentioned at item No. 10 of the list after taking accounts of the same from him. Shri C. B. Doshi, an Advocate of this Court is appointed as a Commissioner to take inspection and make partition of the aforesaid properties except one piece of agricultural land referred to at item No. 2 of this order. As regards the aforesaid piece of agricultural land, a reference shall be made to the Collector, Junagadh for effecting partition thereof amongst the parties in their above specified shares. The plaintiffs to deposit into Court Rs. 500. 00 in the first instance for the expenses and remuneration of the Commissioner within three weeks from the date of this order and the learned Commissioner shall submit his report on or before 31-3-1966. The Collector, junagadh be also requested to submit his report on or before 31-3-1966. The defendant Nos. 1 and 2 will bear their own costs as well as the cotst of the plaintiffs in this suit. The defendant Nos. 3 (1), (2), (3) and No. 4 are ex-parte and as such, no order as to their cotsts. "

( 2 ) THE above judgment and preliminary decree were taken in First Appeal No. 138 of 1966 before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court (Coram : m. P. Thakkar and A. N. Surti, JJ.- Per M. P. Thakkar, J. , as his Lordship then was) by judgment dated 24-10-1972 modified the aforesaid preliminary decree in following terms :-"the learned Counsel for the appellants has, however, objected to the directions given by the trial Court, in clauses (3), (5) and (6) of the order. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx with regard to clause (3), it has been directed that the appellants shall render accounts of the sale proceeds of an agricultural land sold when appellant No. 1 was managing the affairs as a Karta. No fraud has been alleged by the plaintiffs. Under the circumstances, it is argued by the learned Counsel for the appellants that this direction should not have been given. The learned Counsel for the respondents-plaintiffs has conceded that this direction cannot be supported. We accordingly set aside this direction. Turning now to clause (5), the learned trial Judge has directed that the Yajmans whose names are mentioned in the ancestral book shall be allotted to the respective parties by way of partition. It is a strange direction. The Yajmans cannot be assigned to any of the parties without consulting their wishes. Surely the Yajmans cannot be considered to be a joint family property. Realising the strange nature of the direction given by the trial court, the learned Counsel for the respondents conceded that the said direction also may be set aside. We accordingly direct that the direction contained in clause (5) be set aside. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx it is conceded by the learned Counsel for the appellants that in the