- (1.) This is an appeal by certificate. The deceased 1st defendant was the appellant. He as well as the plaintiff died during the pendency of this appeal. Thereafter the appellants 1 to 7 were impleaded as the legal representatives of the deceased appellant. Respondents are the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution as regard appellants 1 and 3 to 7 as per order of this Court dated September 11, 1970. At present the appeal has been pressed only by the supplemental appellant No. 2 who was defendant No. 3 in the suit. The respondents did not contest the appeal.
(2.) This appeal arises from a suit for partition. Plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 were brothers. Defendants 3 and 4 are the sons of defendant No. 1. Defendants 5 and 6 are the sons of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was the eldest brother.
(3.) The case put forward on behalf of the plaintiff was that the family was divided in status in 1351 B. S. but no actual partition by metes and bounds had taken place. Hence he prayed for a partition of the family properties detailed in the plaint-schedule by metes and bounds. He further claimed that the properties standing in the names of defendants 1 to 4 were acquired out of joint family fund and as such were liable to be partitioned.;