JUDGMENT :- This is a plaintiffs suit (appeal?) against a decision of the lower Court dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition of four plots in which the plaintiff claimed that he had under proprietary rights. The plots in dispute are Nos.725, 730, 739 and 856. A small pedigree will help in understanding the facts of the case.

2. The family was joint and in the year 1913 Kunj Behari filed a suit No.16 of 1913 against the sons and grandsons of Ram Autar, Ram Autar having died, for a partition. The plaintiff alleged that he formed a joint Hindu family with the defendants and the properties in suit were joint family properties. The suit was decreed on 28-4-1913, and the plaintiff was given a decree for partition of a one-half share in the properties specified in the first list. It may be mentioned that the contesting defendants had denied that the family was joint and had pleaded that Ram Autar had separated and that they were in adverse possession of the properties in the first list.

3. Plot No.856 was included in the first list and the plaintiff was given a decree for a half share in the said properties. The other items in that list were partitioned but somehow this plot was left

Click Here to Read the rest of this document