JUDGMENT :

A.K. Rath, J.

This appeal is by the defendant nos. 1, 6 to 8 against the reversing judgment.

2. Plaintiff-respondent no.1 instituted the suit for partition. Case of the plaintiff was that Narendra Sekhar Deo was the common ancestor of the parties. He died leaving behind his three sons Chhatrapati, Sreepati and Balmakund. Chhatrapati died issueless. Sreepati died leaving behind his son Shibshankar-defendant no.1. Balmakund died leaving behind his son Jagannath-plaintiff. There was no partition between the parties by metes and bounds. After death of Chhatrapati, plaintiff and defendant no.1 inherited the suit land. Defendant no.1 made an attempt to forcibly occupy the entire suit land taking a plea that he is the adopted son of Chhatrapati. Specific case of the plaintiff was that defendant no.1 is not the adopted son of Chhatrapati. There was no giving and taking ceremony. The defendant no.1 has sold some portion of the land to defendant no.12. With this factual scenario, he instituted the suit seeking the reliefs mentioned supra.

3. Defendant no.1 filed a written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint. Case of the defendant no.1 was that Chhatrapati had no issue.