IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.182 of 2005 Ram Bahdur Rai son of Dhuri Rai,@ Raghunandan Rai, resident of village-Marar, Tola-Bhalwahiya, P.S. Parsa, District-Saran. … Plaintiff.. Appellant… Appellant. Versus 1. Most. Sona Kuer wife of Ramdeen Rai alias Dina Rai, deceased. 2. Birendra Rai, 2(a) Ramudre Rai son of Late Shama Rai, 2(b) Kiran Kumari minor daughter of Late Shama through guardian mother Dhama Devi, (Respondent No.10) All residents of village Marar tola , Bhalwahiya, P.S. Parsa, P.O. Marar, District-Saran, 2(c) Nirmala Devi D/o Late Shama Rai, W/o Gujja Rai, 2(d) Ramawati Devi D/o Late Shama Rai W/o Umesh Rai, Both residents of village-Nawal Tola, P.O. Aami, P.S. Dighwara, District-Saran. 3. Baijnath Rai 4. Baroda Rai 5. Bankim Rai 6. Buneshwar Rai 7. Jai Narain Rai 8. Jai Nath Rai 9. Smt. Malapati Devi, D/o Ramdeen Rai, deceased 10. Smt. Dhana Devi W/o Shama Rai, 11. Smt. Sudama Devi W/o Baijnath Rai 12. Manoj Rai son of Baroda Rai All R/o village –Marar tola Bhalwahiya, P.S. Parsa, District-Saran 12(a) Shushila Devi W/0 Ajay Rai, resident of Pithaghat Rampur Bazar P.S. Garkha , District- Saran 12(b) Urmila @ Parmila W/o Tarkeshwar Rai resident of Rampur Bazar, P.S. Garkha, District-Saran. 13 Smt. Bedamo Devi W/o Bankim Rai 14. Smt. Ram Ratiya Devi W/o Bhuneshwar Rai, 15. Smt. Urmila Devi wife of Jai Narain Rai 16. Malti Devi W/o Jainath Rai ……………… Respondent 1st set. 17. Lal Rai @ Lalit Rai 18. Rajendra Rai both sons of Rambali Rai, @ Bali Rai, deceased 19. Smt. Dachami Devi D/o Ram Bali Rai, deceased W/o Ram Naresh Rai ……………… Respondents 2nd set All residents of village-Marar tola Bhalwahiya, P.S. Parsa, District-Saran and respondent no.19 resident of village Jhaumua Tola, P.S. Parsa, District-Saran ………………… Defendants…Respondents….Respondents. For the appellant : M/s Bishwanath Choudhary and Mallika Mazumdar, Advocates. For the respondents : M/s Ravi Shankar Dwivedi and Ranjan Kumar Dubey, Advocates. ----------- 04/ 20.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. This second appeal has been filed by the sole plaintiff- appellant-appellant challenging the judgments and decree of the learned courts below. 2 The matter arises out of Title Suit No. 154 of 1982, which was filed by the plaintiff for declaring that the properties detailed in Schedule-II of the plaint was joint family property and the deed of gift executed by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant nos. 2 to 6 is not operative to the extent of the plaintiff’s share and for other ancillary reliefs. The said suit was dismissed on contest without cost by the learned 4th Subordinate Judge, Chapra, vide judgment and decree dated 23.12.1992, which was challenged by the plaintiff in Title Appeal No. 17 of 1993. The said title appeal was also dismissed by the learned Fast Track Court No.4, Saran vide judgment and decree dated 15.04.2005, whereafter the instant second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff. From the averments of the parties and the material on record, including the impugned judgments and decree, it is quite apparent that the learned courts below considered the entire pleadings and evidence of the parties in detail whereafter they came to the specific concurrent findings that the properties were already partitioned. It was also concurrently found that the property was purchased by defendant no.1 from his own personal income and was his self acquired property as the plaintiff failed to show any nucleus of the family from which any such purchase could be made. It was also specifically held that the said defendant had purchased the suit property from his own personal income, which had been fully proved by the defendants. It was also held that the deed of gift was executed 3 by the defendant with respect to his aforesaid self acquired property and hence the said sale deed was quite genuine and legal. It was also found that the plaintiff had not challenged the said deed of gift nor any court fee had been paid for setting it aside. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court does not find any illegality in the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below nor does it find any substantial question of law involved in the second appeal, which is accordingly dismissed at this stage of hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. harish/ ( S.N.Hussain, J.)