- (1.) This civil first appeal preferred by appellantdefendants Bhanwar Lal and Madan Lal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Nimbaheda, Camp Badi Sadri in Civil Suit No.67/2005, whereby the learned trial court decreed the suit for partition filed by the respondent No.1-plaintiff Moti Lal.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellants and the respondent No.1 are sons of Ram Karan Maloo (Maheshwari). Ram Karan and Kishan Lal were the sons of Chunni Lal but Kishan Lal went in adoption. The appellants and the respondent No.1 are having one sister namely Sita Bai.
(3.) In the plaint it was averred by the respondent No.1-plaintiff that there was a joint Hindu family of Ram Karan and Chunni Lal. Ram Karan died in the year 1945 and at that time the age of the plaintiff was 10 months. It was further averred that Chunni Lal died about 44 years ago and after the death of Chunni Lal, he left the joint Hindu family's properties situated in Village Bansi, details of which were given in Schedules A, B and C alongwith the plaint. It was further averred that the plaintiff is in service at Tarapur Atomic Power Plant situated in the State of Maharashtra, but earlier he was posted at Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh. All the three brothers have equal shares in the property and all are in possession thereof as co-parceners. It was further averred that the mother of the defendants and the plaintiff, Smt. Ramsukhi Bai, died in the year 1996 and thereafter the plaintiff asked the defendants for partition of the property by meets and bounds, but the defendants only gave assurance that he will get his one-third share in the property. It was further averred that in spite of repeated requests, partition was not made and ultimately on 22.11.1999, the defendants refused for partition of the property and thus, the suit was filed by the respondent No.1- plaintiff valuing it under Section 35 of the Rajasthan Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act by paying the court fee of Rs.200/- and valuing his share in the property as Rs.3 lacs. The plaintiff also prayed for permanent injunction that the defendants be restrained from forcibly dispossessing the plaintiff from the property in dispute. The suit was filed on 03.12.1999.;