SSK/ 1 SA/791.07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 791 OF 2007 Anand Shivram Chitari ....Appellant Versus Smt. Tarabai Shivram Chitari & Ors ...Respondents Mr. Gangadhar J. Sabnis, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. G. H. Keluskar, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATED :28th JULY, 2011. P.C.: Heard Mr. Sabnis and Mr. Keluskar, learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The appellant before this Court is original defendant and the respondents are original plaintiffs. The plaintiffs’ suit for partition and separate possession of the dwelling house and consequentially for permanent injunction was dismissed by the trial court relying upon the provisions of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The respondents/org.plaintiffs’ appeal was allowed by the Lower Appellate Court by the judgment and decree dated 15th April, 2003 which is the SSK/ 2 SA/791.07 subject matter of the present second appeal. The Appellate Court decreed the respondents’ suit on the ground that the suit property was not exclusively used for dwelling as the same was also occupied by one tenant. Be that as it may, Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was deleted by Amendment of 2005. In these circumstances, the appellant/original defendant cannot object partition of the property which is admittedly ancestral. I find no merit in the appeal and therefore, the same is dismissed. (RANJIT MORE, J.)