I.A. Ansari, J.

1. This second appeal has arisen out of the judgment and decree, dated 07.09.2009, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati, in Title Appeal No. 11/2005, where by the learned First Appellate Court has allowed the appeal and set aside the decree, granted in Title Suit No. 306 of 2002, whereby the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 3, Kamrup, Guwahati, as trial Judge, had partly allowed the decree inasmuch as it granted a decree declaring that the suit land is a coparcenery property and the plaintiffs as well as the defendants were coparceners in the suit land, but it declined to grant injunction restraining the defendants from selling the suit land. I have heard Mr. D. Baruah, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellant, and Mr. S. Medhi, learned counsel for the defendants-respondents.

2. The case of the plaintiffs may, in brief, be described thus:

(i) The land, mentioned in the schedule to the plaint, which is hereinafter referred to as the suit land, belonged to one Rabiram Sarania, who died leaving behind two sons, namely, Boloram Sarania (since deceased) and Satara Sarania (since deceased). Late Boloram Sarania left behind two sons, namely, Mahendra Rajbongshi @Sarania (since deceased) and Shri Kamaleswar Rajbongshi @ Sarania (the defendant No. 1 in the suit and the respondent No. 1 in this second appeal). Late Mohendra Rajbongshi @ Sarania left behind his wife, Smti Kusum Rajbongshi, and three sons, namely, Shri Birendra Rajbongshi (plaintiff No. 1 in the suit and the proforma respondent in the present appeal), Shri Dhireswar Rajbongshi and Shri Ramesh Rajbongshi. Smti Kusum Rajbongshi, Shri Dhireswar Rajbongshi and Shri Ramesh Rajbongshi, who were impleaded as the proforma defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in the suit. On the other hand, Late Satara Sarania left behind two sons, namely, Shri Gunadhar Rajbongshi and Shri Guneswar Rajbongshi, Shri Guneswar Rajbongshi being the plaintiff No. 2 in the suit and the appellant in the present appeal.

(ii) Late Rabiram Sarania purchased, during his lifetime, the suit land, which, upon the death of Rabiram Sarania, his two sons, namely, Late Boloram Sarania and Late Satara Sarania (whose descendant the present appellant is) jointly inherited the suit land; but Late Boloram Rajbonghshi, being elder between the two brothers, used to look after the suit land. Taking advantage of the simplicity of Late Satara Sarania, Late Boloram Rajbongshi @Sarania got his name mutated in respect of the entire suit land, though both the brothers, namely, Boloram and Satara remained in joint possession of the suit land and kept cultivating the same and enjoying the fruits of their cultivation. The plaintiffs along with the defendants, being the descendants of Late Rabiram Sarania, continued to enjoy the suit land as coparcenars and the entire suit land remained in joint possession of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants. However, on 30.11.2002, the plaintiffs came to learn from one Sri Kishore Patowary that the defendant No. 1, who is respondent No. 1 herein, had entered into an agreement for sale with the said Kishore Patowary, whereunder 2 Bighas of land, out of the total suit land, measuring 12 Bighas 6 Lechas, were to be sold by defendant No. 1 to Kishore Patowary aforementioned. Being alarmed by the information, which they had so received, the plaintiffs instituted the suit, wherein the reliefs, which they had sought for, read as under:

(a) For a decree for declaration that the suit property, described in schedule A of the plaint, is a Hindu co-parcenary property and parties in the suit are co-parcenars.

(b) For a decree for permanent injunction prohibiting the defendant No. 1, Shri Kamaleswar Rajbongshi, not to transfer any part of land in any manner and to deliver possession of the land to a stranger till the co-parcenary property is partitioned amongst the coparceners.

(c) For any other relief or reliefs the parties are entitled to in accordance wi