of the defendant. So far the contention that there is no pleading of date of partition or year of partition is concerned, it may be mentioned here that according to the parties this transaction took place 100 years ago. In the case of Bhagwan Dayal vs Mst. Reoti Devi AIR 1962 SC 287 the Apex court has held that in the case of old transactions when no contemporaneous documents are maintained and when most of the active participants in the transactions have passed away, though the burden still remains on the person who asserts that there was a partition, it is permissible to fill up gaps more readily by reasonable inferences than in a case where the evidence is not obliterated by passage of time. In this case as has been admitted by the parties, the transaction of partition took place after C.S. Survey. From perusal of the judgment of the lower appellate court it appears that the properties where sold by the parties i.e. the lands of plot no. 472 and plot No. 747. Therefore, admittedly the parties were residing separately, messing separately, dealing the properties independently since long and even the defendants admitted partition with respect to two plots. Now therefore, the cumulative effect of conducts of the parties as alleged show that there had been partition between the parties. In the case
