JUDGMENT :

A.K. Rath, J.

Plaintiff is the appellant against a reversing judgment in a suit for partition.

2. The following genealogy would show the relationship of the parties.

3. According to the plaintiff, the common ancestor Baji Sahu had lands at village Purunagarh and Sanabaliposhi. Schedule ‘A’ land was acquired in the name of defendant no.1 with the aid and assistance of the joint family fund. When the dissension cropped up in the family, the properties were partitioned in February, 1959 by the village gentries. Schedule ‘A’ property along with other ancestral properties were divided into two equal shares. Since then, schedule ‘A’ properties were possessed by the parties separately without any partition by metes and bounds. In the year 1981, the defendant no.1 stacked claim over ‘A’ schedule properties. According to the plaintiff, he is entitled to half share. With this factual scenario, he instituted the suit.

4. The defendants entered contest and filed written statement. They pleaded inter alia that schedule ‘A’ land was not acquired with the aid and assistance of joint family fund. The same was acquired by the defendant no.1 after partition. In the year 1959, the Panch members