ORDER :

2. The revision petitioners are the defendants 1 and 3 in the suit. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners contended that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is not in consonance with the settled principles of law. He placed reliance on Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the same is extracted hereunder:

4. The learned counsel further submitted that the plaintiff does not fall within the category of Class-I legal heirs as enumerated under the Schedule to the Hindu Succession Act. A grandson does not acquire any independent right to seek partition of property already partitioned among his grandfather, father and uncle. In support of this contention, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Angadi Chandranna v. Shankar and others, 2025 (4) CTC 168 and relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder:

18. Apparently, the plaintiffs did not question the partition deed (Ex. P1) effected among the br