Irshad Alam & Ors vs Md. Ismail Ansari & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2485 Jhar

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
                      S. A. No. 192 of 2015
                               ......

Irshad Alam & Ors. ........... Appellants Versus Md. Ismail Ansari & Ors. ........ Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conferencing) .......

For the Appellants : Mr. Manjul Prasad, Sr. Advocate Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Baban Prasad, Advocate.

Mr. Praveen Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rohitashya Roy, Advocate : Ms. Pooja Kumari, Advocate .......

08/22.07.2021 Heard, learned senior counsel, Mr. Manjul Prasad assisted by learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha.

The appellants / appellants / plaintiffs have preferred this second appeal against the concurrent finding of two courts i.e. judgment dated 18.09.2007 passed by learned Sub-Judge-IX, Ranchi in Title Suit No.166/1999 and decree singed on 28.09.2007, affirmed by judgment dated 29.01.2015 and decree signed on 12.02.2015 passed by learned Judicial Commissioner-XI, Ranchi, in Title Appeal No.123/2007, whereby both the courts below have denied the right, title, interest of plaintiffs over the suit property situated in Village - Itki Thakurgoan, P.S.- Bero, Khewat No.02, Khata No.98, R.S. Plot No.1308 area 0.48½ acre, out of total area 0.78 decimals while discussing Issue No. IV by the learned Appellate Court affirming the finding recorded by the learned Sub-Judge-IX, in Issue No. IV itself.

The Courts below have held that plaintiffs have taken mutually inconsistent plea, on the one side plaintiffs have claimed land on the basis of oral purchase and on the other hand, on the basis of peaceful continuous uninterrupted possession over the land by way of adverse possession.

Under the aforesaid circumstances, since there is concurrent finding of two courts and there is no substantial question of law to be made out in the present appeal, accordingly, the second appeal being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sunil-Jay/-