Arat Haran Singh And Ors vs Ashok Singh And Ors

Ram Prasanna Sharma, J

1) This appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment/decree dated 28-3-2006 passed by 9th Additional District Judge (FTC) Bilaspur (CG) in Civil Suit No. 43-A/2005 wherein the said court partitioned the land mentioned in Schedule-A of the plaint to the tune of 63.8 acres between late Ashok Singh/original plaintiff, late Arat Haran Singh, Dr. Komal Singh and Dr. Raghunandan Singh were allotted 1/4th share each.

2) Learned counsel for the both sides would submit that the property which is self acquired property and described in para 11 of the judgment of the trial court shall be excluded from the joint property, and therefore, same should not be included in Schedule- A of the plaint and decree should be modified to that extent.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record in which judgment and decree has been passed.

4) The old house No. 750 situated at Netaji Chowk, Station road adjacent with Janjgir Naila road is joint hindu family property and that should be included in decree for partition as per map annexed with the plain and same is part of the property described in Schedule-A of the plaint. After going through the record and judgment of the trial court, it appears that the land bearing survey No.486/01 area 1./39 acres is self acquired property of Arat Haran Singh and it is not the property of joint hindu family. Again it is decided by the trial Court that the land measuring 0.275 acres which is situated at village Lingyadih is property of wife of Arat Hzaran Singh namely Kanta Singh. The trial court again decided that the land bearing survey No. 2439 area 20 decimal and land bearing survey No. 2772/15 area 8 decimal was recorded in the name of Arhataran Singh which was self acquired property therefore, same cannot be included as joint hindu family. It appears from Schedule-A of the paint that the house situated at village Mahant/Netaji chowk, Janjgir is described as joint hindu family property but that is not included in the decree which ought to have been included in the decree. As per finding of the trial Court, the house situated at Sarkanda valued to Rs.1,00,000/- is property of Smt. Kanta Singh who is wife of Arat Haran Singh.

Looking to the record and submission made by both sides, the decree passed by the trial Court is liable to be modified in the facts and circumstances of the case. The decree passed by the trial Court is modified as under:

I) In Schedule of the decree, house/Dhaba situated at village Mahant valued to Rs.75,000/- (Netaji chowk, Janjgir) shall be partitioned as joint Hindu Family and 1/4th share each shall be partitioned as mentioned in the decree and for that one commissioner may be appointed to divide the parties and parities will get actual share after division by the Commissioner.

ii) In Schedule-B of the decree, survey No. 198.47 area 0.75 acres situated at village Lingyadih, open plot at village Janjgir survey No. 2439/8 area 0.28 acres and open plot survey No. 2772/15 area 0.08 decimal shall be omitted.

iii) In Schedule-B of the decree, the house situated at Sarkanda valued to Rs.1,00,000/- shall be omitted.

iv) As per decree, it does not appear that the land bearing Khasra No. 486/1 area 0.39 is included in the decree, therefore, no modification regarding the said land is required.

v) Rest of the decree shall remain stand as it is.

vi) A modified decree be drawn up accordingly.

Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.