The main legal principle established is the distinction between temporary and permanent partitions, and the need for separate examination of land parcels in partition disputes.

H F Hallifa—There is no appeal and there is none in the Court of the District Judge in respect of field No. 57/1, which was originally sir land but is now apparently recorded as khudkaisht because it is held by the defendant appellant Kesheorao on a lease for ninety nine years from a person who has no other interest in the Village except the proprietary right in that field. The decision that this land must be included from the lands liable to partition is certainly correct, though the true state of affairs does not seem to have been realized.

2. The total area of sir and khudkasht in the village is said to be. 364.39 acres. It is admitted that 107.87 acres of this were acquired by Kesheorao in certain years between 1886 & 1903, and it is in issue between the parties whether he acquired them for his own benefit or for that of the whole proprietary body. In regard to the rest be pleaded that it was divided among the co-sharers about 1380, so that each of them became separate owner of the fields allotted to him. The rights in the two parcels of land clearly require separate examination. Even after it has been found that the division of the lands in 1860 was only a temporary arrangement to say that Kesheorao, an eight-anna proprietor is properly entitled to only one half of all the air and khadkasht in the village is to beg the question as to his acquisition of the 107.87 acres for himself or for all the proprietors.

3. In regard to both parcels of land it has to be remembered that the plaintiffs can at the most claim that Kesheorao shall hand over to them so much land as will make the area of their band equal to the area they ought to held, that is five sixteenth of the total. They cannot claim what belongs to the proprietors of the remaining three annas share in the village, the defendants, other than Kesheorao, who are content that Kesheorao should retain it.

4. In this connection it may be mentioned that one of those other defendants, holding an one anna share but no sir land at all, disclaimed all interest in the suit, but was not discharged and was made a respondent in this and in the lower appellate Court. He did not appear in the lower appellate Court has appeared here, and his costs must be paid by the appellant. But the other defendants, who own a two-anna share and do hold 6.32 acres of sir, were discharged in the first Court before the issues were framed. They also have been impleaded as respondents in both appellate Courts and the appellant is saved iron having to pay for his carelessness only by the failure of those respondents to appear in either Court.

5. In discussing the matter of the areas of the original home-form, apart from Kesheoraos subsequent acquisitions, which are proportionate no the shares of the parries in the village, it has to be assumed that the whole of the 70.80 acres held by the plaintiffs is exactly the part of the original home farm they have always held, neither more nor less. The truth of this gumption is, of cause extremely doubtful, as they also may have made subsequent acquisitions.

6. The total home-farm in the village is 361.39 acres, and the area acquired by Kesheorao from (sic) is 107.87 acres. That levees 236.52 acres. The area in proportion to the share of the partita, which may be called their proper areas, and the areas they actually hold are as follows:-

Proper area

Actual area

Kesheo Rao

(-/8/- )

128 26

179.40

The Plaintiffs

( -/5/- )

80.16

70.80

The other Defendant

(-/3/- )

48.10

6.32

7. It appears then that of the old home-farm Kesheorao would have to hand over not more than 9.36 acres to the plaintiffs, even if it has been held in severalty but owned in common during all these years.

8. As to the partition, the issue has been much complicated by the common use of terms in narrow senses without any definition of them. A division of property an arrangement whereby property, is divided, a distribution of property are all exactly the same as a partition of property. But a partition may be ei