Joint owners of property may partition their shares, and possession by one owner constitutes possession for all; necessary parties are all co-owners.

Judgment:

Present civil suit is filed for partition of structure and partition of vacant land situated over suit land comprised in khata No.129 khatoni No. 138 khasra Nos. 1439, 1440, 1441, 1442, 1443, 1444, 1445, 1446, 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 1447, 1448, 1449, 1450, 1451, 1452, 1458 & 1460 kita 16 measuring 11902.41 situated in Up Mohal Lakkar Bazar (Market) Ward Bara Shimla Tehsil and Distt. Shimla (H.P.) as shown in jamabandi for the year 2010- 2011 Ext.DW-4/D placed on record. It is pleaded that plaintiffs are joint owners of suit property and defendants are also joint owners of suit property. It is pleaded that plaintiffs intend to partition their share. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs requested the defendants to partition the suit property but despite requests defendants did not partition the suit property. Prayer for decree of civil suit by way of partition sought.

2. Per contra written statements filed on behalf of co-defendants No.1, 2 & 4 to 6 pleaded therein that plaintiffs deliberately did not include joint land situated in villages Basiala and Binjon Tehsil Garhshankar Distt. Hoshiarpur (Punjab) in the present suit. It is further pleaded that suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It is further pleaded that correct name of co-defendant No.2 is Mrs. Inderjit Parmar and not Indu Parmar. It is further pleaded that suit has not been properly valued for purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs are out of possession of suit land and they have no cause of action to file the partition suit. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs are estopped by their acts, deeds, conduct and acquiescences to file and maintain the present suit. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs have not approached the Court with clean hands. It is further pleaded that status of parties as co-sharers is not disputed. It is further pleaded that suit for partition of one property situated at Shimla is not maintainable on the ground of partial partition of joint property inter se parties.

3. Separate written statement filed on behalf of co-defendant No.7 Smt. Chander Kanta pleaded therein that suit is filed for partial partition of joint property and same is not maintainable. It is further pleaded that suit has been filed relating to immovable property situated at Shimla town. It is further pleaded that joint property situated at villages Basiala and Binjon Tehsil Garhshankar Distt. Hoshiarpur (Punjab) have not been included in the present partition suit. It is further pleaded that suit has not been properly valued for purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs are estopped by their acts, deeds, conduct and acquiescences to file and maintain the present suit. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs did not approach the Court with clean hands. It is further pleaded that khasra Nos. 1439, 1443, 1451, 1458 and 1460 cannot be partitioned and same should be kept joint because area under above khasra numbers is land in relevant record but factually thick forest is situated at spot. It is further pleaded that area of khasra No.1452 is in the shape of path and same cannot be partitioned in accordance with law. It is further pleaded that area mentioned in khasra No.1445 is in the shape of apple orchard and same cannot be partitioned by the civil Court and same will be partitioned under H. P. Land Revenue Act by Assistant Collector Ist Grade of area. It is further pleaded that co-defendant No.7 Smt. Chander Kanta has carried out annual maintenance and repair of building situated over su