raised by the learned counsel for the appellants that plea of partition was not raised by the appellants before the trial Court is concerned, the appellants filed an application for filing additional written statement raising the plea of partial partition and enlargement of the right of the first appellant under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 during the pendency of the first appeal. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, seeking leave of the Court to file additional written statement, the appellants have not given any acceptable reason for the failure to raise the plea before the trial Court. The first appellate Court dismissed the application filed by the appellants mainly on the ground that they failed to give any convincing reason for their failure to raise plea of partial partition before the trial Court. The plea of partial partition requires adducing of evidence. Therefore, permitting the appellants to raise a new plea of partial partition in the first appellate stage would amount to reopening of the case and recording of evidence. Therefore, the first appellate Court rightly held that the petition filed by the appellants seeking leave of the Court to file additional written statement in the first appellate stage cannot be accepted due to their failure to give any convincing reason for filing the application before the first appellate Court.
