ORDER IN APPEAL:

1. Present appellants, who are the original defendants in Regular Civil Suit No. 114 of 1999, have challenged the judgment and decree dated 7th October 2016 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Junagadh in Regular Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2012 dismissing the said appeal preferred by the present appellants confirming the judgment and decree dated 9th May 2012 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Keshod in Regular Civil Suit No. 114 of 1999.

2. Short facts of this case may be referred as under:

That, the original plaintiffs filed Regular Civil Suit No. 114 of 1999 for partition and mesne profit of the agricultural land situated in the sim of village Ajab, Taluka: Keshod, District: Junagadh. As per the averments made in the suit by the plaintiff, in all 16 acres 6 gunthas of land situated in the sim of village Ajab was an ancestral property and they are coparceners of the said property, which is particularly described in the plaint. That in all, there were four pieces of the land. As per say of the plaintiff, each of the party have equal share ie., 1/6th share in the disputed property and the defendants are in possession of the suit property. The plaintiffs prayed their share as well as mesne profit. On a request made by the plaintiffs, it was denied by the defendants to hand over their shares in the suit property, and therefore, plaintiffs filed the suit for the aforesaid prayer of partition and mesne profit etc.

3. On receiving summons issued by the lower court, the defendants filed their written statement vide Ex. 13 contending that the father of the defendants and plaintiffs No. 2 to 4 ie., Bhimabhai Daki was murdered and in a litigation, huge amount was spent and they were in debt, and therefore, all the plaintiffs handed over the property to the defendants and defendants agreed to pay the entire debt of the disputed property. It was further contended that the plaintiffs did not want to cultivate the suit property, and therefore, the possession of the disputed property was handed over to the defendants. That, they have already paid debt of their father Bhimabhai Daki. The plaintiffs suppressed the material facts and have not come before the Court with clean hands. After considering the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Judge framed issues vide Ex. 14 and recorded the evidence of the parties. After hearing the arguments of all the parties, learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Keshod was pleased to decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiffs on 30th October 2002. The defendants, being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, preferred Regular Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2002 before the learned District Court, Junagadh, which was decided on 17th February 2011 and matter was remanded back to the trial Court with certain directions. The trial Court, again, recorded the evidence of the parties and by judgment and decree dated 9th May 2012, Regular Civil Suit No. 144 of 1999 was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. Again, the defendants, being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 9th May 2012, preferred Regular Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2012 before the court of learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Junagadh. Learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Junagadh, vide judgment and decree dated 7th October 2016, dismissed the said appeal preferred by the present appellants and confirmed the preliminary judgment and decree dated 9th May 2012 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Keshod in Regular Civil Suit No. 114 of 1999.

4. By way of this appeal, the present appellants challenged the said judgment and decree passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh dismissing their appeal ie., Regular Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2012.

5. Heard learned advocate for the appellants.

6. As concurrent findings of the lower court as well as the first appellate Court are passed in Second Appeal preferred by the present appellants under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Proce