Arindam Mukherjee, J. - (1.) The appellants and the respondent no. 9 are the sons and daughters of Md. Bashir through his first wife Begum Noor Jahan. The respondent no. 1 is the second wife of Md. Bashir. The respondents no. 2,3,4 and 5 are the daughters of Md. Bashir through his second wife Nargis Begum (respondent no.1). The appellants have filed a Partition and Administration suit claiming their share in the estate left behind by Md. Bashir who died on 15th January, 2007 claiming that the said Md. Bashir died intestate. The appellant say that Noor jahan Begum died on 3rd July, 2000, two of daughters of Md. Bashir, namely, Husne Jahan and Roshan Jahan and one son Md. Mehmood through his first wife Noor Jahan Begum pre-deceased Md. Bashir. Md. Mehmood died on 12th March, 1998, Husne Jahan on 19th July, 1975 and Roshan Jahan on 17th October, 2006. The plaintiffs have suggested in the plaint a share holding pattern in terms whereof of the heirs of Md. Bashir inherited his estate upon his death in intestacy. In the alternative the plaintiffs have claimed for determination of the shares of the parties and allocation thereof by partition by metes and bound.
(2.) The appellants further alleged that Md. Bashir did not execute any gift deed in favour of Nargis Begum (respondent no. 1) in respect of the municipal premises no. 75, Elliot Road, Kolkata-700016 as claimed by the said Nargis Begum. The appellants, therefore, has claimed for a declaration that the purported deed of gift dated 3rd August, 2003 said to have been executed by Md. Bashir in favour of Nargis Begum be adjudged void and/or voidable and not binding on the appellants. They also claimed that the mutation of the said premises no. 75, Elliot Road, Kolkata-700016 in favour of Nargis Begum said to have been made by dint of the deed of gift be set aside and the municipal assessment book be corrected accordingly. The appellants have also claimed for a preliminary decree in accordance with the share mentioned in the plaint or as may be found by this Court, as also a final decree of partition in the terms of the said preliminary decree and for appointment of a Commissioner of Partition to effectuate the partition by metes and bounds. The appellants have also claimed consequential relief in the nature of injunction as also for damages for a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- in addition to injunction. The appellants have also impleaded the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, the Municipal Commissioner and the Assessor Collector (South). The Kolkata Municipal Corporation is party defendant no. 6, 7 and 8. They are respondent no. 6, 7 and 8 in the appeal respectively.
(3.) The defendant no. 1 has contested the suit by filing her written statement. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 has also filed a separate written statement. The respondent nos. 1,2 and 3 in their written statement have contended that, Md. Bashir had executed a deed of gift in favour of Nargis Begum on 3rd August, 2003 which is a registered document and by virtue of the same, the said Nargis Begum is a sole and exclusive owner of premises no. 75, Elliot Road, Kolkata-700016. So far as the other properties and assets mentioned in the schedule to the plaint are concerned, it is the case of the defendant nos. 1, 2 and 3 (respondent no.1, 2 and 3) that some of the properties had been sold by Md. Bashir during his lifetime and the residual properties are joint properties in which the heirs of Md. Bashir have shares according to Hanafi School of Mohammedan Law, which governed Md. Bashir till his death.;