partition between Jethuram and his brothers. Jethuram got Survey Nos. 62/1, 72/18, 133/3 ad-measuring 0.218 hectare, 0.226 hectare and 0.332 hectare, respectively, at Kawardha and Sheet No. 10, Plot No. 148 ad-measuring 1200 sq. ft at Rajmahal Chowk, Kawardha. The properties stated above are suit properties. It is further pleaded that Sitabai was the legally wedded wife of defendant No. 1 and after the birth of the plaintiff, she was ousted. Later, defendant No. 1 married Neerabai and defendants No. 3 to 5 being illegitimate children have no right over the suit property. It is also pleaded that from the income of the joint family property, defendant No. 1 purchased a house at Jabalpur and the same was sold in consideration of Rs. 30 lacs and thereafter, three houses were purchased at Raipur. It is further pleaded that in the year 2007, there was a partition between defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff. The plaintiff got properties mentioned in Schedule (A) in partition. It is further pleaded that the revenue records were not rectified therefore; the properties were recorded in the name of defendant No. 1. It is further pleaded that defendants No. 1 to 5 are trying to alienate the properties and in this regard, notice was published in the newspaper. Defendants No. 1 to 5 filed their written statement and denied plaint averments. They stated that the marriage between Seetabai and Jethuram was dissolved and thereafter, Jethuram married Neerabai. It is further pleaded that the properties as stated except ancestral property, are self-acquired property of defendant No. 1. It is also pleaded that partition took place in the year 2007 and in lieu of the share of the plaintiff, a bank draft of Rs. 3,70,000/- was given to the plaintiff and defendant No. 6, mother of the plaintiff. They denied the contention made by defendant No. 6 that a bank draft of Rs.
