IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.660 of 2009 1. SAKET BIHARI KARAN @ SITA RAM, S/O LATE BINOD BIHARI PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE & POST-RAM NAGAR, P.S.-KHUDWAN, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD, PRESENTLY AT SRI KRISHNA NAGAR (AHARI), P.S.-TOWN, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. 2. AMITANSHU KUMAR, MINOR SON OF SRI SAKET BIHARI KARAN, REPRESENTED THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN, THE PETITIOENR NO. 1. ……………DEFENDANTS/PETITIONERS. Versus 1. SHASHI BHUSHAN PRASAD 2. SATISH KUMAR 3. AJIT KUMAR 4. SHALESH KUMAR 5. BIBHUTI BHUSHAN ALL SONS OF LATE DAYA NAND PRASAD 6. SMT. BIMLA DEVI, W/O LATE DAYA NAND PRASAD 7. BINITA DEVI, W/O DEEPAK 8. SMITA BOTH DAUTHER OF LATE DAYA NAND PRASAD ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-RAM NAGAR, P.S.-OBRA, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD, AT PRESENT ALL RESIDING AT NORTH LOCO TANK AREA, HEERAPUR, DHANBAD. 9. ANIL KUMAR SINHA 10. SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, BOTH SONS OF LATE SATYA NARAIN PRASAD 11. GAYATRI DEVI, W/O LATE SATYA NARAIN PRASAD 12. ANJANI KUMAR 13. ABHYA KUMAR, BOTH SONS OF ANIL KUMAR SINHA 14. MRINAL RANJAN 15. PRAKASH RANJAN 16. NISHANT RANJAN ALL MINOR SONS OF SUNIL KUMAR SINHA ALL THREE MINOR SONS, UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP AND WELL WISHERS OF THEIR FATHER SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, ALL RESIDENT OF CHITRAGUPTA NAGAR, CLUB ROAD, AURANGABAD. 17. NAGENDRA PRASAD, S/O LATE AWADH BIHARI PRASAD 18. SANJAY KUMAR SINHA, S/O NAGENDRA PRASAD 19. SANJEEV KUMAR SINHA, S/O NAGENDRA PRASAD 20. AJAY KUMAR SINHA, S/O NAGENDRA PRASAD ALL AT PRESENT RESIDING AT NEAR POST OFFICE, P.W.D. QUARTER, BEERAPUR, DISTRICT- DHANBAD. ……………PLAINTIFFS/OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 2 27.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This civil revision application has been filed by defendant no. 1 and 2 against order dated 24.1.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge- - 2 - 1st in Partition Suit No. 308 of 2002. By the said order learned court below has allowed the amendment application of the plaintiff and has allowed addition of number of plots and property in the schedule of the partition suit. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact there is a partition in the family and the plots sought to be included in the schedule of the plaint have been transferred or gifted through valid deeds by the co- parceners in whose share the property may fall as a consequence of the earlier partition. In partition suit one party may bring on record and include any joint family property in the schedule of the properties for partition claiming the same to be a joint family property. But it does not prevent the other party to challenge the jointness of the property and to claim that the property, as a consequence of earlier partition or otherwise, had not remained joint family property any longer especially when the transactions in respect of those properties were confirmed by the courts earlier in different proceeding. This defence is still available to the - 3 - defendants they may take in their additional written statement which they have liberty to file as a consequence of amendment allowed in the plaint. With the above observations, this revision application is disposed of. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)