- (1.)THIS judgment will dispose of Second Appeals Nos. 732 of 1970, 54 of 1971 and civil Revision No. 51 of 1971 also. These cases were heard together as they involve common question of law.
(2.)THE plaintiff, Mahadeorao is a non-alienating coparcener. All the other members of the joint Hindu family of Which he is a member, his brothers. Khushalrao. Ganpatrao, Shamrao and Vasantrao and his mother. Mst. Savitribai, joined in alienating certain items of joint family property. The plaintiff thereupon brought suits to impeach the alienations, claiming a declaration that the alienations were not binding on him as they were not for legal necessity. He, therefore, claimed possession of the alienated property from the purchasers. Those suits were dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that there was no joint family in existence. That decree was affirmed in appeal in two of the suits. In the other two suits, the decree was, however, reversed. Both the parties, therefore, appealed to the High Court. Naik, J. , in Narayan v. Mahadeorao, 1971 MPLJ 239 held that there was no disruption of the joint status, and as the alienations were not for legal necessity, the plaintiff was entitled to be placed in possession of the whole of the property. The learned Judge, however, stayed the execution of the decree for a period of three months to enable the purchasers to file a suit for general partition, and work out their rights in such a suit. Admittedly, the purchasers have now filed a general suit for partition,
(3.)AFTER the decision of this Court, the plaintiff brought suits claiming mesne profits for the years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67, i. e. , for the period during which the second appeals in title suits were pending in this Court. The learned trial Judge in second Appeals Nos. 714/70, 732/70 and 54/71 decreed the plaintiff's suit in its entirety. On appeal, the learned Additional District Judge has however, modified that decree and made the mesne profits payable proportionately to the share of the plaintiff in the faint family property, i. e. , to the extent of l/6th share. The learned trial Judge in the small cause case, where the plaintiffs were Mahadeorao and Vasantrao, decreed proportionate mesne Profits according to their share, i. e. , to the extent of l/3rd. That is the subject-matter of Civil Revision No. 51 of 1971 in this Court.