Shaffique, J.

1. Since common questions arise for consideration in the above Regular First Appeals (RFAs), they are heard and decided together. The judgment in the RFAs has a bearing to the judgment which is impugned in LAA No.48/2012 and hence the said appeal is also heard and decided along with the RFAs.

2. RFA Nos.151/08 and 372/08 have arisen from the common judgment in OS No.209/1996 and RFA No.373/2008 had arisen from the very same common judgment relating to OS No.614/95. LAA No. 48/12 has arisen from the judgment in LAR No.188/1998 which was decided separately.

3. RFA No.372/2008 has been filed by defendants 1 to 4 and 8 in OS No.209/1996 and RFA No.151/2008 has been filed by the defendants 10 and 11 in the same suit. RFA No.373/2008 has been filed by the plaintiff in OS No. 614/1995.

4. The suit, O.S.No.209/1996 was filed by Indira Kumari as plaintiff seeking for partition of the plaint schedule properties. It was contended that the plaint schedule properties were obtained by the plaintiff and defendants as per partition deed No.3275 dated 30/6/1958 wherein the property was described as D schedule. Since the plaintiffs and defendants 2 to 6 were minors, the plaint sc