Banesingh vs Navalsingh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3165 MP

                                   1
 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE
                        National Lok Adalat
                    Second Appeal 542 of 2016
                  Banesingh Vs. Navalsingh & Anr.

Indore, Dated:- 10/07/2021

      Heard through video conferencing.

      Shri Nitin Phadke, Counsel for the appellant.

      Shri J. B. Mehta, Counsel for the respondent No.1.

This is an appeal filed by the defendant No.1 against the

judgment and decree dated 05.12.2015 passed by I Civil Judge, Class-

II, Sanwer, District- Indore in Civil Suit No.48-A/2014 whereby the

suit filed by respondent - Naval Singh has been allowed. Thereafter,

the Bane Singh filed a first appeal No.41/2015 and vide judgment

dated 21.10.2016 III Additional District Judge, Indore has dismissed

the appeal and affirmed the judgment and decree. Hence, this second

appeal by Bane Singh.

Vide order dated 29.11.2016 this appeal has been admitted on

the following substantial questions of law for final arguments.

"Whether courts below were justified in decreeing the suit misinterpreting the provisions of Section 178(a) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code accepting the partition took place in the year 1975 between the members of joint Hindu family, however the finding so recorded can be sustained in law ?"

During pendency of appeal respondent No.1/plaintiff Naval

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE National Lok Adalat Second Appeal 542 of 2016 Banesingh Vs. Navalsingh & Anr.

Singh expired on 20.12.2020, hence, appellant filed an application i.e.

I.A. No.1809/2021 under Order 22 Rule 4 of C.P.C. Application is

supported by an affidavit and death certificate. The legal heirs are

represented by Shri J. B. Mehta, Advocate. Hence, the application

under Order 22 Rule 4 of C.P.C. is allowed. Legal heirs be

incorporated in the memo of appeal.

After the death of Naval Singh, now the appellant and the legal

heirs of the Naval Singh have entered into a compromise.

Accordingly, they jointly filed an application i.e. I.A. No.4255

of 2021 under Order 23 Rule 3 of C.P.C. The terms of the settlement

are reproduced below:-

"¼v½ ;g fd] xzke vtuksVh] rglhy gkrksn] ftyk bUnkSj fLFkr losZ dzekad 7

jdck 0-522 gS] 98 jdck 0-186 gS] 137 jdck 0-235 gS] [email protected] jdck 0-137 gS]

[email protected] o [email protected] la;qDr jdck 0-445 gS] [email protected] o [email protected] la;qDr jdck 0-243 gS]

183 jdck 1-602 gS] [email protected] jdck 0-121 gS] [email protected] jdck 6-762 gS] ,oa [email protected]

jdck 0-980 gS dh Hkwfe ds laca/k esa izR;kFkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjlksa dks HkwfeLokeh loRo

izkIr gksuk vihykFkhZ Lohdkj djrk gSA blh izdkj izR;kFkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjl dzkWl

vkCtsD'ku ij cy ugha nsuk pkgrs gSA

¼c½ ;g fd] xzke vtuksVh fLFkr nkfo;k Hkwfe eas ls losZ dzekad 98] 137] [email protected]]

[email protected]] [email protected]] [email protected]] [email protected]] 183 dh Hkwfe;ka vihykFkhZ ds vkf/kiR; esa gksdj]

mDr losZ uacjksa dk HkkSfrd vf/kiR; vihykFkhZ }kjk izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjlksa dks

fnukad [email protected]@2021 dks lkSai fn;k gSA xzke vtuksVh fLFkr 'ks"k nkfo;k losZ uacj

vFkkZr losZ dzekad 7] [email protected] ,oa [email protected] dh Hkwfe;ka izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjlksa ds gh

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE National Lok Adalat Second Appeal 542 of 2016 Banesingh Vs. Navalsingh & Anr.

vf/kiR; esa gSA

¼l½ ;g fd] xzke vtuksVh rglhy gkrksn] ftyk bUnkSj fLFkr losZ dzekad

[email protected] jdck 0-121 gS dh [kys dh [kqyh Hkwfe ds laca/k esa mHk;i{k ds e/; ;g r;

gqvk gS fd vihykFkhZ ds edku ds iwoZ fn'kk dh che ls yksgs ds ,axy ds e/; dh losZ

dzekad [email protected] dh yxHkx 0-047 gsDVj Hkwfe dk iathd`r fodz; i= izR;FkhZ dzekad 1

ds okfjlksa }kjk bl le>kSrk vkosnu ds fu"iknu dh fnukad ls rhu ekg esa vihykFkhZ

ds i{k esa fu"ikfnr dj fn;k tkosxk rFkk losZ dzekad [email protected] ds mDr fcdzhr Hkkx

dk iw.kZ LokfeRo ,oa vf/kiR; vihykFkhZ dks izkIr gksxkA blh izdkj mHk;i{k ds

e/; ;g r; gqvk gS fd vihykFkhZ ds iq= fnyhiflag] mldh ifRu ccyhckbZ rFkk iq=

dqanuflag firk fnykiflag] muds Hkwfe Lokeh LoRo dh xzke vtuksVh] rglhy gkrksn]

ftyk bUnksSj dh Hkwfe losZ uacj [email protected] jdck 0-035 gSA esa ls 0-018 gS Hkwfe dk

fodz;i= izR;kFkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjlku euksgjflag] esgjckuflag] x.kirflag ds i{k esa

Åij fy[ks losZ uacj [email protected] jdck 0-047 gsDVs;j ds iath;u ds le; gh fu"ikfnr

djsaxsA ;g dk;Zokgh ,d gh le; gksxhA

¼n½ ;g fd] vihykFkhZ }kjk vius O;; ls xzke vtuksVh] rglhy gkrksn] ftyk

bUnkSj fLFkr losZ dzekad 183 ij V~;wcosy yxk;k x;k gS] tks vihykFkhZ }kjk IkzR;FkhZ

dzekad 1 ds okfjlksa dks lkSai fn;k gS rFkk mlds ,ot esa izR;kFkhZ dzekad 1 ds

okfjlksa }kjk xzke vtuksVh] rglhy gkrksn] ftyk bUnkSj fLFkr vihykFkhZ ds LokfeRo

dh vU; Hkwfe ij 270 QhV xgjk V~;wcosy ,oa dsflax izR;kFkh dzekad 1 ds okfjlksa }

kjk Lo;a ds O;; ls yxok dj fn;k tkosxkA

¼b½ ;g fd] vf/kuLFk U;k;ky;ksa }kjk feUl izkfQV~l tek djus ds vkns'k ds

ikyu esa vihykFkhZ }kjk :i;s 2]00][email protected]& ¼v{kjh :i;s nks yk[k ek=½ dh jkf'k

U;k;ky; esa tek dh xbZ gS] ftlesa ls izR;FkhZ dzekad 1 ds okfjlku :i;s

1]00][email protected]& ¼v{kjh :i;s ,d yk[k ek=½ dh jkf'k izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh jgsaxs rFkk

vihykFkhZ :i;s 1]00][email protected]& ¼v{kjh :i;s ,d yk[k ek=½ jkf'k izkIr djus dk

vf/kdkjh jgsxkA

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE National Lok Adalat Second Appeal 542 of 2016 Banesingh Vs. Navalsingh & Anr.

¼Q½ ;g fd] mHk;i{k okn O;; ,oa vihyksa dk O;; viuk viuk Loa; ogu djsaxsA "

In view of the above, finally appeal is disposed of.

Judgment and decree dated 05.12.2015 passed by the I Civil

Judge Class - II, Sanwer, District Indore is modified.

Fresh decree be drawn in terms of the settlement.

              (Justice Vivek Rusia)                    (Aniket Abhay Naik)
                    Member                                  Member


Pankaj
Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANDEY
Date: 2021.07.14 17:08:59 +05'30'