K. P. Singh, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition arises out of a suit filed by the petitioners for partition of their share in the disputed property under section 176 of the UP ZA and LR Act. The plaintiffs-petitioners had claimed 1/3 share in the disputed property on the basis of the following pedigree ;-
(2.) THE petitioners had not accepted Smt. Sumaria as widow of Ajodhya and had claimed 1/3 share in the disputed property per pedigree given above. The claim of the petitioners was contested by the contesting opposite parties as would be evident from the issues framed in the suit. The trial court partly decreed the plaintiffs' suit as is evident from the judgment dated 6-5-1966 (Annexure '7'). Thereafter the petitioners preferred an appeal which was dismissed and in second appeal also the petitioners have failed, as is evident from the judgment dated 30-7-1975. Aggrieved by the judgments of the revenue courts the petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners has contended before me that the sale deed of the year 1906 was not binding upon the petitioners because it was not executed by Smt. Somaria as guardian of the petitioners. Before me it has been admitted that Smt. Somaria was widow of Ajodhya, though originally the petitioners had denied that Smt. Somaria was widow of Ajodhya. The second contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the first appellate court has wrongly refused to examine the contents of various sale deeds.;