Piare Lal v. Bharat Singh And ANR.

Deepak Kumar 2025.05.13 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3589-2000 -2of the defendants. The parties having already partitioned, they are no more joint in property. The suit was not maintainable. 4.

Both the Courts below dismissed the suit holding that even though plaintiff admitted in his cross-examination that old ancestral house is in his possession, yet the same has not been made subject matter of the suit and thus the suit is bad for partial partition. Apart from that, the Courts below also opined on the merits of the case holding that the defendants were raising construction, which proves that the parties have already partitioned their property.

5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through records of the case.

6.

In the considered opinion of this Court, once the suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the Courts below for being bad for partial partition, the Courts ought to have restrained themselves from opining on the merits of the case.

7.

In view of above, liberty is granted to the plaintiff/appellant to file fresh suit for partition. In case, such suit is filed, the same shall be decided. The findings recorded in the present lis shall not operate as res judicata.

8.

The instant appeal is disposed off accordingly. May 08, 2025 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2025.05.13 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document