Smt. Maya Guin vs Amar Kar & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2636 Cal

10      06.05.2022                        FA 6 of 2021
                                                with
Ct-08                     I.A No. CAN 1 of 2020 (Old No. CAN 1346 of 2020)

                                         Smt. Maya Guin
                                               Vs.
                                         Amar Kar & Ors.
ar

                        Mr. Srinjay Sengupta
                        Mr. Sourav Roy
                        Mr. Narattam Acharyya
                                    ... For the Appellant

                        Mr. Jayanta Samanta
                        Mr. Sunil Kumar Brahmachari
                                    ... For the Respondent nos. 1 to 4

Mr. Devajyoti Barman Ms. Sanjukta Basu Mallick ... For the Respondent no. 9

By consent of the parties the appeal is treated as on day's list and is taken up for hearing along with the application. After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the parties we find that the essential disputes with regard to the identification and partition of the land gifted to the mother of the parties by their father in respect of 3 cottah 6 chittak land along with 7 chittak common passage. This property was gifted to the mother of the parties in the year 1974.

The parties have agreed before us that they will file an application for partition of this property for immediate enjoyment and there may not be any necessity to decide on the other properties, which are yet to be brought on record for which fresh proceeding may be initiated. However, it may create a complication, as at the time of final decree the Commissioner may think of payment of owelty money and exchange of property on the basis of the shares declared, we

feel that the parties may file an application for amendment of their pleadings to include all the properties, which were inadvertently left out and subsequently discovered after filing of the suit. In the event, such amendment is made, the learned Trial Judge may allow such amendment and appoint a Partition Commissioner after declaration of the shares.

The objection of the appellant with regard to the validity of the "Nirupan Patra" (Deeds of Settlement), we do not find any substance as it was validly executed in favour of the two sons by the father and more erroneous description of the said properties would not invalidate the said two Deeds.

Accordingly, the judgment and order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) in allowing the counter claim stands affirmed. The parties shall not deal with, dispose of, let out or alienate the 3 cottah 6 chittak land along with 7 chittak common passage, as mentioned in the deed of gift executed in 1974, till the partition suit is finally decided. In view of the above, FA 6 of 2021 is disposed of. CAN 1346 of 2020 is accordingly disposed of.

(Sugato Majumdar,J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)