Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

Aggrieved of order dated 17.12.2014 passed in Partition Suit No. 09 of 2000, whereby an application under Order 1, Rule 10 read with Order 22, Rule 10 C.P.C filed by the petitioners claiming purchase of a part of the suit schedule property from defendant nos. 9, 11, 12(a), 12(b) and 12(c) has been declined, the petitioners have approached this Court.

2. Partition Suit No. 09 of 2000 was instituted by Santosh Kumar Ganguli for a decree for ½ share in the suit properties. The suit was contested by the defendants disputing the address of the defendants disclosed in the partition suit. It was pleaded that in M.S record of rights name of Durga Prasad Ganguli, Sarda Prasad Ganguli and Kashishwar Ganguli in respect of M.S Holding No. 22/A, H. No. 810 of M.S New Holding No. 1176 in Ward No. VI (old) ad-measuring about 261 Kari is recorded, however, the Municipal Records stood in the name of Durga Prasad Ganguli only and after his death rent receipts were issued in his name. Schedule 'B' properties, it was claimed, are owned and possessed by heirs of Durga Prasad Ganguli and after his death his son, daughter and wife came in possession over the said land. The d