Short Note : 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's suit was for possession of certain-agricultural lands situated in villages Putariahar and Pachariahar of Tahsil and District Chhatarpur. These lands were sold by Smt. Singrawanwali, defendant No. 1, in favour of defendants 2 to 4 by a sale-deed executed on 19th May 1965 for a consideration of Rs. 4,000/-. The plaintiff claimed that the sale-deed as not binding on him. Smt. Singrawanwali is the widow of Kriparam who died sixteen or seventeen years before the institution of the suit. Kriparam and the plaintiff Satan and are brothers and their father's name was Ganpat. Satanand claimed that the entire suit lands which were sold by Singrawanwali belonged to him exclusively and that the defendants had no title, the case of Singrawanwali was that Satanand separated in the life-time of Ganpat and was allotted certain other lands as h is share in village Pachariahar. Ganpat and Kriparam continued joint and after Ganpat's death, all the lands in village Putariahar and the suit lands of Pachariahar came to be vested in Kriparam. After Kriparam's death, these lands came into possession of Singrawanwali. Held : Both the Courts have held that there was a partition in the family as pleaded by Smt. Singrawanwali. Even the plaintiff Satanand admitted that he was in possession of nearly half the lands in village Pachariahar. The lands over which the defendants were in possession were separated by a Medh which showed that there was partition of the fields. Satanand further admitted that after Ganpat's death, the lands of village Putariahar were mutated in the name of Kriparam alone and were in his possession, After Kriparam's death, the name of Singrawanwali alone was mutated in respect of the lands of village Putariahar. The finding of partition reached by the Courts below does not suffer from any error of law. In the partition that took place during the life-time of Ganpat, the plaintiff Satan and separated. The remaining lands were held by, Ganpat and Kriparam as members of joint family. After Ganpat's death, these lands came to be vested in Kriparam exclusively and on Kriparam's death the lands were inherited by Singrawanwali. It is thus clear that the plaintiff had no title to the suit lands. The suit was, therefore, rightly dismissed. Appeal dismissed