IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Ramdhan Bedia – Appellant
Versus
Chopni Devi – Respondent
S.A. No. 521 of 2003
Decided On : 09-02-2023
Partition Suit - Descendants - C.N.T. Act - [Partition Suit No. 45 of 1993, C.N.T. Act]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed a Partition Suit No. 45 of 1993 claiming 1/2 share in the suit property and full right over khata No. 32. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and the appellate court, leading to the second appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove their right, title, and interest over the property in question. It was established that the lands had already been divided and the parties were cultivating them separately for a long time. The court affirmed the judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court.
Issues: The main issue was whether the plaintiffs had any right, title, interest, or possession over the lands of khata No. 17 and 32. The court also considered the discrepancies in the plaintiff's evidence regarding his father's identity.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the lands had already been divided, and the right of the parties defined, precluding repartition. It also considered the discrepancies in the plaintiff's evidence and found that the plaintiffs failed to prove their claim.
Final Decision: The second appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law was involved.
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. R.N. Sahay, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.
2. This second appeal has been filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment dated 30.09.2002 and the decree following thereupon signed on 08.10.2002, passed in Title Appeal No. 02 of 2001, by the learned ADJ-VII, Hazaribag, dismissing the said appeal and thereby confirming the judgment dated 12.09.2000 and the decree signed on 22.09.2000, passed in Partition Suit No. 45 of 1993, by the learned Addl. Sub Judge, Hazaribag.
3. The appellants/plaintiffs have instituted the Partition Suit No. 45 of 1993 for a decree of partition of 1/2 share in the suit property detailed in Schedule-B of the plaint. Further prayer has been made for declaration of their full right over khata No. 32 detailed in Schedule-C of the plaint and also the cost of the suit.
4. On framing of the issues and on contest, the partition suit, being Partition Suit No. 45 of 1993, filed by the appellants/plaintiffs was dismissed by the learned trial court by judgment dated 12.09.2000. Aggrieved by that, the appellants/plaintiffs filed Title Appeal No. 02 of 2001, which was decided by the judgment dated 30.09.2002, whereby the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the learned trial court was affirmed by the learned appellate court. Aggrieved by that, the present second appeal has been filed.
5. The appellants/plaintiffs instituted the suit stating therein that the parties in the suit are descendents of one common ancestor namely Sukher Bedia, who died before the Cadestral Survey and settlement operation leaving 3 sons Jethu Badia, Jitu Bedia and Lado Bedia, who inherited the properties of Sukher Bedia and came in possession of the same, the genealogical table has been given in Schedule-A of the foot of this plaint. Jethu Bedia, Jitu Bedia and Ledo Bedia separated in mess and cultivation without partition for sake of convenience. Jitu Bedia died leaving behind a son Sahur Bedia before survey, Sahur Bedia also died leaving behind a son Chetlal Bedia. The land of Jitu Bedia recorded under Khata No. 13 in the name of Chetlal Bedia and one daughter of Chetlal Bedia are in possession over which these parties have no concerned. Ledo Bedia died leaving behind one son namely Megnath Bedia. During survey operation Jethu Bedia was Karta of his family and looked after the survey affairs and he got 19.96 acres of land recorded in his name under Khata No. 17 of village Jabo, whereas, he got the area of 14.27 acres recorded in the name of Megnath Bedia under Khata No. 32 of village Jabo. Both Jethu Bedia and Megnath Bedia in spite of the separate record of right cultivated separate land in both khata Nos. 17 and 32 according to convenience without partition by metes and bounds. Jathu Bedia died after survey, leaving one son Megha Bedia, who came in possession also. Megnath Bedia died leaving behind 3 minor sons Doman Bedia, Barhan Bedia and Ramcharan Bedia and his wife Kewato Devi who inherited the interest of his father, the wife of Megnath Bedia Kewato Debi remarried with Megha Bedia son of Jethu Bedia as first wife of Megha Bedia had died earlier. Megha Bedia has 2 sons Ghuja Bedia and Bansi Bedia from his first wife and after marriage with Kewato Devi 3 sons born namely Tulsi Bedia, Munsi Bedia and Mahadeo Bedia were born from second wife Kewato Devi. Since Doman, Barhan and Ramcharan Bedia were minor so Megha Bedia took care of them and cultivated all the lands of Khata No. 17 and 32 jointly and when Doman and his two brothers attained majority he divides the lands of Khata No. 17 and 32 half and half between his 05 sons on one hand and three sons of Meghnath Bedia on the other hand and all remained in possession paid rent jointly and got rent receipts being granted in the name of Jethu Bedia and Megnath Bedia but rent are being paid half and half for both khatas by the pla
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove every link in a genealogy when a case is based on it, and the court's reliance on documentary evidence and oral witnesses ....
A party seeking partition must challenge the validity of prior transactions affecting the property and cannot seek partition of property that has been sold and is in the possession of third parties w....
In disputes regarding partition of joint Hindu family property, the burden of proof lies on the party asserting partition, and the presumption of jointness remains unless clear evidence to the contra....
Khatedari rights under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act are granted only to actual cultivators, not to those claiming through others without evidence of cultivation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.