JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal is preferred by the original plaintiffs to challenge the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court. The trial court had decreed the suit granting one-fourth share jointly to the plaintiffs by declaring that the sale deed in favour of defendant no. 2 was not binding on the plaintiffs’ share. Defendants nos. 1, 2 and 3 were declared to have one-fourth share each in the suit property. The First Appellate Court partly allowed the first appeal preferred by defendant no. 2 and modified the trial court’s decree to the extent of the suit properties, which were the subject matter of the sale deed executed in favour of defendant no. 2.

2. Plaintiff no.1 is defendant no. 1’s daughter-in-law, i.e. wife of defendant no.1’s predeceased son (“Ramchandra”). Defendant nos. 2 and 3 are the other two sons of defendant no. 1. Plaintiff nos. 2 to 4 are children of plaintiff no.1 and Ramchandra. The suit for partition and separate possession was filed with respect to Gat Nos.304, 466, 313, 310, 302 and 467. Defendant no. 2 claims to have purchased four Gat numbers out of the suit properties, i.e. Gat No. 302, 304, 466 and 467. The suit was filed for a declarat