S.B. Sinha, J. - (1.) The defendant No. 6 is the appellant in this appeal. A suit for partition was filed by the plaintiff respondent No. 1 - in respect of a property measuring 15 cottahs 8 chittaks and 29 square feet together with a three-storeyed building standing thereupon and out-house, garages etc. being the Municipal Premises No. 3/1 Heysham Road, Bhowanipore Calcutta. The plaintiff in the said suit claimed ⅓rd share in the said property. The fact that the plaintiff had ⅓rd share in the property is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the defendant No. 1 had ⅓rd share in the property. It is also not in dispute that the other defendants have ⅓rd share of the property as per the geonological table.
(2.) Although it appears that various suits were filed in respect of the property held by the parties, the questions which now boil down are : 1) Whether in view of the statements made in the written statement filed by the appellant herein the suit was bad for partial partition; and 2) What would be the extent of the share of the appellant vis-a-vis his brothers. In the additional written statement the appellants stated- "That the plaintiff instituted Title Suit No. 9 of 1966 in the Court of Subordinate Judge at Jalpaiguri in respect of the entire joint properties movables and immovables in which the parties have unity of title and unity of possession and in the said suit the plaintiff impleaded various persons named as purchasers. But in the present suit for partition the plaintiff has left out all other properties except the property situated at 3/1 Heyasham Road, Calcutta, P.S. - Bhowanipore, all the parties who were made parties in Title Suit No. 9 of 1966 instituted by plaintiff in the Court of Subordinate Judge at Jalpaiguri."
(3.) It may be noticed that the details of the properties purported to be situated at Jalpaiguri had not been stated.;