JUDGMENT

1. This appeal raises an interesting and difficult question. Chabbu Lal, the plaintiff, sued his cousin, Ram Chander, and two sons of Ram Chander for partition of the joint family property. The panties are descended from a common ancestor, Ganga Prasad, who was a pragwal. The family property consisted of land, houses and birt jajmant. The defendants admitted that the family had been joint and that the plaintiff was entitled to partition but pleaded that a partition had in fact already taken place and that a suit would not lie for a second partition. With regard to this birt jajmant the defendants pleaded that it had already been partitioned in the only way in which partiton was possible, that is to say, it had been agreed to divide the income. In this appeal we are only concerned with two items (1) a certain house built on land bounded by the letters B.C.H.E. on the map on the record, and (2) the birt jajmant. Dealing with the second item first, the Trial Court held that it was impossible to give a decree for partition of this birt jajmant and gave a declaration to the effect that the parties were entitled to enjoy the income of it half and half. The plaintiff appealed, and