IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.303 of 2005 1. Awadh Bihari Singh, son of late Basudeo Singh 2. Kashi Nath Singh, son of Awadh Bihari Singh 3. Nikhil Kumar 4. Bishal Kumar 5. Niraj Kumar Nos. 3 to 5 are minor sons of Kashi Nath Singh under guardianship of Kashi Nath Singh, father and next friend. All residents of vildlage and P.O. Sadokhar, P.S. Chenari, District Rohtas (Sasaram). ….Plaintiffs-Appellants-Appellants. versus 1. Indrajit Singh, son of late Laxmi Singh 2. Wakil Singh 3. Binod Singh Both sons of Indrajit Singh 4. Satendra Singh 5. Arvind Singh 6. Arun Kumar Singh 7. Ashok Kumar Singh All sons of Wakil Singh 8. Nawnit Kumar, minor son of Arvind Singh under the guardianship of Arvind Kumar Singh @ Arvind Singh, father and next friend. 9. Sudhir Kumar (minor) son of Binod Singh under the guardianship of Binod Singh, father and next friend. 10. Pawan Kumar (minor) son of Satendra Singh, under the guardianship of Satendra Singh father and next friend. 11. Gopal Singh, son of late Chandradeo Singh 12. Pramod Kumar 13. Ajay Kumar Both sons of Gopal Singh 14. Babalu Kumar 15. Chhotu Kumar Both minor sons of Pramod Kumar under the guardianship of Pramod Kumar, father and next friend. 16. Prince Kumar minor son of Ajay Kumar under the guardianship of Pramod Kumar, father and next friend. 17. Dinanath Singh, 18. Nanhaku Singh, Both sons of late Kunj Bihari Singh 19. Mahendra Singh, son of Dinanath Singh 20. Shishir Kumar 21. Hemant Kumar 22. Anand Kumar Nos.20 to 22 minor sons of Mahendra Singh under the guardianship of Mahendra Singh , father and next friend. 23. Aalok Kumar Singh 24. Rishi Kumar Singh Both sons of Nanhaku Singh - 2 - 25. Pankaj Kumar, minor son of Aalok Kumar Singh under the guardianship of Aalok Kumar Singh, father and next friend. 26. Sita Ram Singh 27. Bharath Singh Both sons of late Suraj Bansh Singh 28. Abhay Kumar 29. Awakash Kumar Both minor sons of Sita Ram Singh, under the guardianship of Sita Ram Singh, father and next friend. 30. Navin Kumar 31. Sushil Kumar Both minor sons of Bharat Singh, under the guardianship of Bharat Singh , father and next friend. 32. Rahul Kumar Singh, minor son of Arun Kumar Singh under the guardianship of Arun Kumar Singh, father and next friend. 33. Nitish Kumar, minor sons of Aalok Kumar Singh, under the guardianship of Aalok Kumar Singh, father and next friend. 34. Vivekanand Kumar, minor son of Rishi Singh Kumar under the guardianship of Rishi Kumar Singh, father and next friend. 35. Pawan Kumar, minor son of Ajay Kumar Singh under the guardianship of Ajay Kumar Singh, father and next friend. 36. Mantu Kumar, minor son of Ajay Kumar Singh, under the guardianship of Ajay Kumar Singh, father and next friend. All residents of village and P.O. Sadokhar, P.S. Chenari, District Rohtas (Sasaram) …Defendants-Respondents-Respondents. ---- For the Appellants : Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the Respondents: None. ----------- 05/ 25.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellants. 2. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs- appellants-appellants challenging the judgments and decree of both the learned courts below. 3. The matter arises out of Title Suit No.137 of 1994, which was filed by the plaintiffs for partition of their ½ share in the land detailed Schedule `Ka’ and `Kha’ of the plaint and ¼ share in the land detailed in Schedule `Ga’ of the plaint and for other ancillary reliefs. - 3 - 4. The said title suit was dismissed on contest without cost by the learned Subordinate Judge-VII, Sasaram vide his judgment and decree dated 03.02.1998. Against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the trial court, the plaintiffs filed Title Appeal No. 37 of 1998, which was also dismissed on contest by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Fast Track Court No. III, Rohtas vide his judgment and decree dated 26.08.2005. The said judgments and decree of both the learned courts below are under challenge in the instant second appeal. 5. From the arguments as well as from the materials on record including the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below, it is quite apparent that the learned courts below have very carefully considered the pleadings and evidence of the parties and found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove that the land, detailed in Schedule `A’ of the written statement, was self acquired property of Basudeo Singh, who was in separate possession of the same, whereas, the defendants through their reliable evidence have been able to establish that the land, detailed in Schedule `A’ of the written statement, was the joint family property and was in joint possession of the family. 6. It was also found by the learned courts below that in a suit for partition the plaintiffs had left the land detailed in Schedule `A’ of the written statement and did not include it in the suit land claiming it to be exclusive property of their father. Hence, having found that the property detailed in Schedule `A’ of the written statement was joint family property, the partition suit filed by the - 4 - plaintiffs only with respect to some of the lands of the family was clearly hit by the principle of partial partition and was, accordingly, dismissed. Law is well-settled that only in very exceptional circumstances, a suit for partial partition can be allowed, but the plaintiffs have failed to show any such special circumstances and hence the learned courts below were quite justified in rejecting the plaintiffs’ suit. 7. This Court does not find any illegality in the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below nor does it find any substantial questions of law involved in the instant second appeal, which is, accordingly, dismissed at this stage of hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )