HANS RAJ Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following pedigree-table will be helpful in understanding the circumstances giving rise to this Civil Revision 1085 of 1972 :-

(2.) In para 3 of the plaint, it is stated that Smt. Tekka Devi, Defendant 3, does not claim any share out of the properties, though she is entitled to a share when some partition of the joint ancestral properties takes place, but she has been impleaded to avoid any complication.

(3.) Hans Raj defendant, in his written statement, raised inter alia the objections that the suit was bad for misjoinder of charges and causes of action and that the suit for accounts was not maintainable. He added in para 4 :