Concurrent findings of fact by subordinate courts regarding partition of ancestral property cannot be interfered with in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, unless the appellant demonstrates perversity, illegality, or a substantial question of law.

1. Since both the appeals assail the common judgment and decree and involve interconnected issues, they were heard and being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Challenge in these appeals is to the common judgment and decree dated 29.10.2025 passed by the first District Judge Balodabazar in Civil Appeal No. 30-A/2024 (Nohar Prasad (dead) through LR’s Manoj Kumar & Others) and Civil Appeal No. 22-A/2024 (Paras Pandey vs. Nohar Prasad (dead) through LR’s Manoj Kumar & Others) by which the Civil Appeal preferred by the plaintiffs was partly allowed whereas the civil Appeal preferred by Paras Pandey was dismissed. The aforesaid civil Appeals were arising out of the judgment and decree dated 04.05.2024 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division Kasdol District Baloda bazar in Civil Suit No. 17-A/2017 (Nohar Prasad Pandey & Others vs. Paras Pandey & Others) by which the learned trial Court directed for partition of the suit property bearing Khasra No. 5 area 9.834 hectare in equal share of 1/12.

3. (a) Before proceeding with the case, it is noteworthy to mention here that earlier the plaintiff Nohar Prasad Pandey preferred Civil Suit No. 17-A/2017 (Nohar Prasad Pandey & Others vs. Paras Pandey & Others) which was allowed by the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2023, whereby the suit was decreed declaring that the plaintiffs are entitled to 1/5th share in the suit land situated at Village Rewasarar, P.H. No. 02, Tehsil Kasdol, District Balodabazar–Bhatapara (C.G.), as described in Schedule ‘A’ appended to the plaint, comprising five khasra numbers admeasuring 9.834 hectares.

(b) Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 16.08.2023, the defendant No. 1 preferred civil appeal No. 14-A/2023 (Paras Pandey vs. Nohar Prasad & Others), which was decided by the learned First Additional District Judge Balodabazar by judgment dated 26.02.2024 and remanded back the matter holding that the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2023 passed by the Trial Court are hereby set aside, and the matter is remitted to the Trial Court under Order 41 Rule 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for carrying out further proceedings. The Trial Court was directed to afford an opportunity to the plaintiffs to produce the genealogical tree and to permit both the plaintiffs and the defendants to make consequential amendments in their pleadings; to peruse its order sheet in respect of witnesses already examined and clearly specify the sequence of the plaintiffs’ witnesses; to frame three additional issues; and thereafter to provide both parties an opportunity to adduce evidence and produce documents in support of their respective cases, and to decide the matter in accordance with law within a period of two months. The parties was directed to appear before the Trial Court on 04.03.2024 for the aforesaid proceedings.

(c) After remand of the matter, the learned trial Court considered the issue and decided the same on 04.05.2024 holding that the plaintiffs have successfully proved their case on the preponderance of probabilities. Accordingly, the suit in respect of the suit land bearing Khasra No. 05, admeasuring 9.834 hectares with land revenue of Rs. 53, is decreed and the following preliminary decree is passed: (i) it is declared that each of the plaintiffs is entitled to 1/12th share in the suit property situated at Village Rewasarar, P.H. No. 02, Tehsil Kasdol, District Balodabazar–Bhatapara (C.G.), as described in Schedule “A” annexed to the plaint; (ii) the plaintiffs are entitled to obtain possession of their respective shares upon due partitio