7.It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the
Appellants relying on the judgment of this Court reported in 2009
(Supp.1) Bom. C.R.270 in the matter of Anandrao Shripati Patil
and Anr. Vs. Jeetendra Laxman Patil & Anr., that only undivided
portion of the suit property is purchased and therefore, same will
not be hit by the provisions of the said Act. Perusal of the judgment
reported in Anandrao Shripati Patil (Supra) shows that, in that
particular case, only half undivided share is purchased by the
Petitioner. It is specifically observed in paragraph 11 of the
Judgment in said case that taking into consideration the contents
of the sale deed under which the plaintiff in that matter purchased
half undivided share in the land, it has been held that what is
transferred is share in the undivided agricultural land. It has been
further held that for the purpose of giving specific shares to the
parties as per sub-section (1) of section 8-AA of the said Act,
partition shall be so effected as not to create any fragment. As the
land was 2 Acres and 1 Guntha, if it is divided equally, it may
create a fragment, and in that case, the procedure laid down in
sub-section (2)(a) of section 8-AA has to be followed. It is further
held that in effecting partition amongst several co-sharers, it is
found that a co-sharer is entitled to a specific share in the land and
