K.L. Manjunath, J.—The appellant who was defendant 2 in O.S. No. 24 of 2000 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Raichur is challenging the legality and correctness of the Judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Raichur, dated 8th February, 2006.

2. The facts leading to this case are as follows:

Respondents 1 and 2 were plaintiffs before the Court below Respondent 3 was defendant 1 and the appellant herein was defendant 2 and the remaining respondents were respective defendants 3 to 40. During the pendency of this appeal, one Rajendra Kumar Patil who was not a party before the Court below has been arrayed as respondent 41.

3. The plaintiffs instituted. a suit for partition and separate possession of their 1/2 share in the plaint schedule properties and to declare that the sale deed executed by the second defendant in favour of defendants 3 to 39 are not binding on them.

4. The plaint schedule properties are non-agricultural lands measuring 2 acres 21 guntas situated in, Sy. No. 1130; 36 guntas in Sy. No.1136 situated at Raichur bounded on East by Road, West by Site Nos. 1132 and 1135; North by Site No. 1137 and South by Site No.1137 and