The defendants are contesting the suit stating that there had never be
en any partition of the properties and it being the properties of Monohar Sharma, all his Clas
s-I legal heirs have the right over the same. It is their further case that the plaintiff bein
g the elder brother had managed to obtain the signatures of his brother, defendant no. 1 on th
e documents and by filing those in the ceiling proceeding under Orissa Land Reforms Act initia
ted against the properties of Monohar Sharma, this land being kept within the retained area wi
thin the ceiling holding has been further managed to be kept in his share in the partition of
the properties into two half ignoring the defendant no. 5 and 6 and by depriving them of their
legal rights over their fathers property. It is further stated that the defendant nos. 5 and
6 have filed Consolidation Revision Case No. 486 of 2004 and the issue would be answered there
in as to whether there was any partition between Hari Shankar Sharma and Ramkrishna Sharma in
so far as the land of their father namely, Manohar Sharma is concerned or if they are still jo
int and these defendant nos. 5 and 6 have got any right, title, interest and possession over t
he suit land.
