DEBANGSU BASAK, J. - (1.) IN this suit for partition a preliminary decree relating to five immoveable properties was passed on September 17, 2002.
(2.) SO far as the other immovable properties and the businesses of the family were concerned, the judgment and preliminary decree dated September 19, 2002 provided that, the learned Joint Commissioner of Partition appointed by such judgment and preliminary decree would make an enquiry as to whether there was any dispute as regard the share of the parties in relation thereto. If the learned Joint Commissioner of Partition found that there was any dispute and if any party made any greater claim or share than mentioned in the plaint, then the learned Commissioner of Partition would call upon the parties to prove the same and for such purpose the learned Joint Commissioner of Partition would take evidence. Such evidence was directed to be submitted before the Court on the date of submitting the Return. If no dispute was raised so far as the residuary properties were concerned, the Joint Commissioner of Partition was directed to take effective steps for getting the properties and businesses partitioned and divided by metes and bounds as far as possible and to submit a comprehensive Return in respect thereof. The personnel of the Joint Commissioner of Partition were subsequently changed to the present Commissioner of Partition. The present Commissioner of Partition filed a Return which he forwarded to the Advocate for the parties under cover of a letter dated July 1, 2005. The Return of the Commission of Partition was annexed to the petition as Annexure 'C'.
(3.) BY the present application the plaintiffs sought setting aside of such Return of the Commissioner of Partition.;