suit in C.S.No.545 of 1994 filed by his brother covering the suit property along with the other properties for partition, he could ... share that would be allotted to the defendant in the partition suit.
(vi) The trial court without citing any valid reason simply decreed the suit
partition
suit being Title suit No.51 of 1970 in the Court of learned Sub-Judge 3rd Court,
Midnapur for partition wherein both plaintiff ... said partition suit being Title Suit
No.51 of 1970. He next submits that though defendant No.1 appeared in said
partition suit and filed
partition suit on the
plea that the suit properties are ancestral properties. Since the
defendant no. 1 was intending to transfer the suit property ... mortgaged properties and he also filed suit for partition of his legal
share vide Title (Partition ) Suit No. 39 of 2008.
It has further been
suit for partition, which according to him is not collusive, no transfer of property subject matter of partition suit can be effected without permission ... respondent herein in the suit or proceeding will not affect his right in the suit property by enforcing a partition. Admittedly, the appellants, having purchased
Shri Mahendra Narayan Singh, 2nd Additional
Subordinate Judge, Jamshedpur in Partition Suit No. 122 of 1990.
---
Ravindra Taunk and others ... ... ... ... ... Appellant
Versus
Smt. Vasanti ... additional Subordinate Judge, Jamshedpur in Partition Suit No.
122 of 1990.
2. The suit was filed for partition of the joint Hindu family properties
which
provisions of the Partition Act .
1.26. The plaintiffs had never requested for effecting partition. The plaintiffs were also parities in the suit ... their right and for partition in case their right to partition is denied or challenged. Such a suit is not barred by res judicata
learned court below also wrongly not
relied upon the partition decree passed in Title Partition Suit No.58 of 1929
which was between the sons ... defendant-appellant to show that after partition between the
sons of Ritlal Singh in Partition Suit No.58 of 1929 which was compromised
suffers from defects of partial partition.
On the defect of partial partition, the trial Court dismissed the partition suit.
Against this, the present First Appeal ... there
had already been partition as found above, there is no question of reopening
of partition arises as this partition suit is not maintainable
effect the partition of the suit property, the Plaintiffs filed the present suit for the reliefs of partition and separate possession of their ... shares of the suit property. The suit was barred by limitation. The Plaintiffs claim of right in the suit property itself was extinct by operation
properties were in danger, they filed the present Suit.
(ii)The suit for partition is not maintainable without adding of all the joint family properties ... 18th share in the suit properties
42.In response, the Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the suit for partition filed by the Plaintiffs
