1. Appellant/original plaintiff has filed this second appeal under section 100 of the CPC against the judgment and decree dated 21.9.2013 passed in Civil Appeal No.68-A/2013 by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Chhindwara, whereby the judgment and decree passed on 7.1.2009 in Civil Suit No.45-A/2006 dismissing the suit filed by the appellant for declaration of his share in disputed agricultural lands, partition and mesne profit has been affirmed.

2. Admittedly, appellant Charanlal and his brothers Mehtu, Ram Prasad, Mehtab and Ajab are sons of Nanhu. Mehtu, Mehtab and Ajab had expired. The respondents No.1 and 2 are LRs of Mehtu, respondents No.3 to 5 are LRs of Mehtab and the respondents No.7 to 9 are LRs of Ajab. It is also not disputed that agricultural lands of village Kundalikala of Tahsil Parasia, District Chhindwara bearing Survey No.113/5 area 0.567 hectares and Survey No.114/4 area 0.061 hectare, total area 0.628 hectare had been previously sold by the appellant to purchaser Ammobai.

3. The appellant Charanlal filed a suit before the trial Court on the pleadings that his father late Nanhu and late Bhoora were the cousin brothers, who were co-owners of agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos.77, 112/8, 112/10, 112/11, 79, 80, 81 and 86, whose total area was 28.45 acres of vilalge Kundalikala, in which each of them was having equal share. On 17.4.1953, appellant Charanlal with his brother Mehtab, Ram Prasad and Ajab purchased from above mentioned Bhoora, his half share i.e. 14 acres 22.5 decimals in total lands 28.45 acres and got possession of it, thereafter lands were undivided. On 5.6.1961, Nanhu, Mehtu, Mehtab, Ram Prasad and Ajab sold 2.65 acres land from Survey Nos.81 and 86 to Gobareya and delivered possession. Thereafter remaining 25.80 acres disputed land of suit is undivided property of appellant and the respondents No.1 to 9. Nanhu had sold 2.65 acres land from his share of 14.22 acres, thus share of Nanhu was only 11.57 acres, in which each of the appellant and his four other brothers is having 1/5th share. Similarly in the land purchased on 17.4.1953, each of the appellant and his three purchaser brothers is having 1/4th share. Thus the appellant’s total share was 5.87 acres, from which after deducting the 1.52 acres sold by the appellant to Ammobai, the appellant is having share of 4.35 acres in disputed land.

4. It was also pleaded by the appellant that the above mentioned joint agricultural lands were not divided in life time of Nanhu. Each of the respondents No.1 to 9 had got separate mutation of his name in revenue record without any legal partition. The respondent No.10 Bihari and respondent No.11 Ramesh are having no relation with the appellant's family, but each of them had got some land mutated separately in revenue record in his name. Thus the appellant filed a suit for declaration of his share, partition and mesne profit.

5. Before the trial Court, the respondents No.1 to 8 filed joint written statement and respondent No.10 Bihari filed separate W.S., in which similar pleadings were taken. It was pleaded by above mentioned respondents that the respondent No.10 Bihari is also a son of Nanhu and actually Nanhu was having six sons, but the appellant had not given actual family tree. Bihari is also a brother of Charanlal, Mehtu, Ram Prasad, Mehtab and Ajab. Deceased Mehtab's three daughters have not been made parties in the suit by the appellant. Actually, about 40 years before in the year 1977, there had been a mutual partition between the appellant and all his brothers and each of them had received separate Bhu-Adhikar Pushtika from the revenue department and each brother had got his share in partition. Like appellant Charanlal, some other brothers had also sold some lands separately to concerned purchaser. The appellant himself had sold some lands from his share to Ammobai. The respondents have developed the lands fallen in their shares. There is no question of any new partition. Previousl