Honble TATIA, J.–Heard learned counsel for the appellant as learned counsel Shri S.C. Maloo submitted that even after intimation to respondents, he has not given instructions to him in this appeal.

(2). The plaintiffs suit for cancellation of the sale deed and alleged partition was dismissed by the trial Court by judgment and decree dated 11.8.1976. The appellate Court also dismissed the appeal on 5.8.1983. Hence this second appeal.

(3). Brief facts of the case are that according to the plaintiff, one plot was purchased by the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 Udai Singh from one Bheru Singh by registered sale deed dated 5.10.1959. The plaintiff and defendant No. 2 constructed the house over the said plot. The plaintiff and defendant both were running a business of transport and, therefore, were partners in the business. The business in partnership of the plaintiff and the defendant was closed in the year 1964 and both started their separate business of transpiration. The house remained joint and in possession of the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff and defendant both the kept separate portion in their possession but without any partition. It was done for convenience only.

(4).

Click Here to Read the rest of this document