- (1.) This revisional application is at the instance of defendants No. 2 & 7 in a suit for partition by separation of share and is directed against order No. 57 dated March 27, 2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Contai, in Title Suit No. 126 of 2000 thereby rejecting an application filed by the petitioners for passing a second preliminary decree after modifying the earlier one.
(2.) The opposite party No. 1 filed the aforesaid suit for separation of ka-1 schedule property from ka schedule property on the allegation that the parties were co-sharers and that he was entitled to get a specific portion, namely, ka-1 schedule property. The aforesaid suit was contested by the present petitioners thereby resisting the claim of the opposite party No. 1 and their contention was that the suit property was a joint property and as such the plaintiff could not claim any specific portion as full owner thereof and pray for separation of that portion. They however maintained that they had no objection if the entire property was partitioned among the parties.
(3.) The learned Trial Judge by his judgments and decree dated May 29, 2002 decreed the suit in preliminary form thereby accepting the claim of the plaintiff. By the said decree the learned Trial Judge declared that the plaintiff had full share in ka-1 schedule property and the parties were directed to partition the property amicably in terms of the preliminary decree within a specified time. In default, the parties were given liberty to apply for appointment of a Commissioner for effecting partition in terms of the preliminary decree.;