DESAI, C.J. :- This appeal, which came up for hearing before Mithan Lal, J. has been referred by him to a larger bench, because the question involved in it is of general importance and has not been answered by any authoritative decision.

2. Respondent No. 1 sued the appellants for partition of joint sir and khudkasht land claiming that she had a one-third share in it and that the appellants had the remaining two-third share. The suit was contested by the appellants who contended that the plaintiff-respondent was not in possession at all, that they had been in exclusive and adverse possession for more than 12 years and that the respondent was not entitled to partition. The respondent claimed to have inherited one-third share in the land in dispute from her father, who had died more than 25 years ago and who was a co-sharer along with the appellants of the land in dispute. The appellants did not plead either that the respondent never obtained possession over her share after inheritance or that she was dispossessed after entering into possession. They vaguely pleaded that they were in adverse possession for more than 12 years. They did not deny possession of the respondents' f