LODHA, J.—The following pedegree may be helpful in understanding the facts relevant for the decision of this appeal:—

Mohanlal

Girdharilal(issuless) Kanhiyalal Biharilal Gerilal(died issveless)

Brijmohan Gopal

Krishanlal Sunderlal Ganeshlal

Govindlal

2. Brijmohan and Gopal filed a suit on 8-12-1954 in the court of Munsiff (East) City, Jaipur against Ganeshlal and Govind for possession of one tin shed over the Jharoka in the first floor and a Gotha in the ground floor of a house situated in the Chowari Ramchanderji, Jaipur, alleging that the house in question was the ancestral property of Mohanlal gone in adoption to his maternal grandfather Devishanker on 13-9-1879. It was averred that Kanhiyalal and his wife died during the life-time of Mohanlal and at the time of Kanhiyalals death all his three sons, namely, Krishanlal, Sunderlal and Ganeshlal ware minors and consequently Mohanlal, their natural grand-father, started looking after them, and they also used to mess and reside with Mohanlal, and thus, according to Brijmohan and Gopal, the defendants were in permissive occupation of the apartments in dispute. It was further stated that Krishanlal and Sundrlal died issueless and defendant No. 1 Ganeshlal continued to occupy the apartments in dispute as licencee. The case of Brijmohan & Gopal was that Girdharilal, Biharilal & Gerilal, and other three sons of Mohan Lal inherited the house in question and were in possession of the same as owners, but that on 15th September, 1948 Ganeshlal declared himself to be a descendant of Mohanlal and got an entry made in the survey record to the effect that he had one third share in the house in dispute. This gave rise to the suit by Brijmohan and Gopal, who pleaded that their suit was within limitation by virtue of Article 144 of the Limitation Act, 1908. This suit was registered as Civil Suit No. 453 of 1954.

3. Soon after the institution of the suit by Brijmohan and Gopal on 30-6-1955 Ganeshlal also filed a suit against Brijmohan and Gopal for partition of the house in question claiming half share in it. This suit was instituted in the Court of Civil Judge, Jaipur and was registered as Civil Suit No. 144 of 1955 Both the suits were transferred to the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Jaipur City, who by his judgment dated 20-4-1961 dismissed Ganeshlals suit for partition as he came to the conclusion that his father Kanhiyalal had gone in adoption to his maternal grandfather Devishankar and had thereby lost all his rights in natural family. He also dismissed the suit filed by Brijmohan and Gopal for possession of specific apartments on the ground that the alleged permissive occupation by Ganeshlal was not proved and that the suit was also barred by limitation u/Art.142 of the Limitation Act.

4. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree in the partition suit No. 144 of 1955 Ganeshlal filed appeal which was registered as Appeal No. 167 of 1961. Similarly Brij Mohan and Gopal also filed appeal against the decision in suit No. 453 of 1964 and their appeal was registered as Appeal No. 252 of 1961. The learned District Judge, Jaipur City by a signle judgment dated 18 3 64 dismissed Ganesh Lals appeal, but allowed Appeal No. 252 of 1962, filed by Brijmohan and Gopal and decreed their suit for possession of the Kotha and the tin-shed.

5. Ganeshlal has not filed any appeal to this Court in the partition suit, but has preferred this appeal from the decree passed by the District Judge for possession of the tin-shed and the Kotha pertaining to suit No. 453/1954 and has urged that the suit was clearly barred by time.

6. Before I embark upon the consideration of the rival contentions advanced on behalf of the parties I should make it clear that the decree of dismissal of Ganeshlals suit for partition has become final and it must be held for the purpose of decision of this appeal also that Ganeshlals father Kanhiyalal had gone in adoption to Devishanker and had lost all his rights in the natural family,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document