Ashok Kumar Prasad @ Ashok Kumar Gupta v. Indu Devi And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Second Appeal No.216 of 2014 =========================================================== Ashok Kumar Prasad @ Ashok Kumar Gupta son of Late Banarsi Prasad Haribol, resident of Mohalla- Hajipur, Police Station and District- Khagaria ........ Defendant No. 5 ....... Appellant No. 13 .... .... Appellant

Versus

1. Indu Devi, wife of Rajniti Prasad Gupta

2. Manwendra Kumar

3. Salesh Kumar @ Pappu

4. Vivek Kumar Bharti All sons of Late Rajniti Prasad Gupta

5. Shashi Kiran Gupta

6. Punam Kumari Gupta Both daughters of Late Rajniti Prasad Gupta resident of Mohalla- Hajipur, Police Station and District- Khagaria ..... Substituted plaintiffs ..... Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 ....... Respondent lst set

7. Rohit Prasad

8. Bhola Prasad

9. Dwarika Prasad

10. Jugnoo Prasad All sons of Late Hanishchandra Prasad Gupta null

11. Renu Kumari

12. Gita Kumari

13. Sharda Kumari

14. Usha Kumari

15. Sadhana Kumari

16. Muni Kumari All daughters of Late Hanishchandra Prasad Gupta

17. Vina Gupta, wife of Late Chandra Shekhar Prasad Gupta null

18. Sukhraj Gupta

19. Gopi Gupta Minor sons of Late Chandra Shekhar Prasad under guardianship of their mother and next friend Viva Gupta

20. Kabita Kumari, daughter of Late Chandra Shekhar Prasad 7 to 20 are resident of Mohalla- Hajipur, Police Station- Khagaria, District- Khagaria

21. Prithabi Chand Gupta, son of Late Ganesh Gupta

22. Satya Narayan Prasad

23. Madan Prasad

24. Tej Bahadur Prasad All sons of Late Anant Prasad

25. Radha Devi

26. Sabitri Devi

27. Kamla Devi

28. Nirmala Devi All daughters of Late Anant Prasad

29. Smt. Ashalata

30. Bina Kumari

31. Kushum Lata All daughters of Late Dr. Debnarain Prasad

32. Satish Kumar

33. Rabish Kumar

34. Jwala Kumar All sons of Late Bimla Devi, daughter of Late Anant Prasad 21 to 34 all residents of Mohalla- Hajipur, Police Station- Khagaria, DistrictKhagaria

35. Pramila Kumari

36. Majula Kumari Both daughters of Late Kushum Lata

37. Smt. Malti Devi, wife of Late Ramchandra Gupta

Patna High Court SA No.216 of 2014 dt.13-12-2016

38. Purnima Kumari

39. Nilu Kumari Both daughters of Late Ramchandra Gupta

40. Shyam Sundar

41. Amit Kumar

42. Sanjai Kumar All sons of Late Ramchandra Gupta

43. Mamta Kumari

44. Minu Kumari Both daughters of Late Ramchandra Gupta

45. Chunui KUmari

46. Munui Kumari

47. Krishnawatia Kumari

48. Krishna Kumari, All daughters of Smt. Bimla Devi, daughter of Late Anant Prasad. 35 to 47 all residents of Mohalla- Hajipur, Police Station- Khagaria, District- Khagaria ..... Substituted Defendants ..... Respondents .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kundan Bahadur Singh Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-12-2016 Heard Mr. Kundan Bahadur Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.

2. The defendant No. 5 is the appellant in this appeal against the judgment and decree of affirmance granting decree of partition to the plaintiff.

3. The facts in detail need no notice for the purpose of this appeal and suffice it to state that the plaintiff filed the suit for partition asserting that the suit property was joint family property and the plaintiff got half share in the same. The defendants resisted the prayer of the plaintiffs for the grant of decree of partition.

4. Both the courts below have come to the concurrent findings of fact that the suit property was joint family property in which the plaintiff has got half share as there is unity of title and jointness of possession

Patna High Court SA No.216 of 2014 dt.13-12-2016 between the parties. The findings of both the courts below have proceeded on the basis of admission made by the defendants in deposition as well as in the written statement and other evidence.

5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, however, has submitted that both the courts below have not correctly appreciated the evidence led on behalf of the parties. However, during course of submission no perversity or unreasonableness in the findings by both the courts below could be shown or established. The findings by both the courts below have been recorded on the basis of evidence which were acceptable and could have been relied upon.

6. This Court, therefore, finds that there is no substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed.

(V. Nath, J.) Snkumar/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 16.12.2016 Transmission Date N/A