Bhagwandas Gupta vs Raju Khatik
2023 Latest Caselaw 2864 MP

                                                            -   1 -


                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                       AT JABALPUR
                                                           BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                               ON THE 16th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                            SECOND APPEAL NO.1752 OF 2021

                                Between:-

                                1. BHAGWANDAS GUPTA S/O DWARKA PRASAD GUPTA,
                                   AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O GURU GOVIND SINGH
                                   WARD, SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                2. ATUL NIJHAWAN S/O SHRI TILAKRAJ NIJHAWAN,
                                   AGED    ABOUT   52   YEARS,   OCCUPATION:
                                   CONTRACTOR R/O GURU GOVIND SINGH WARD
                                   SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)


                                                                                      .....APPELLANTS

                                (BY SHRI AMAN CHOURASIA - ADVOCATE)

                                AND

                                   RAJU KHATIK S/O CHANDRABHAN KHATIK R/O
                                   SHANKARGARH     MAKRONIYA,   TAHSIL AND
                                   DISTRICT SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)


                                                                                      ....RESPONDENT

                                (BY SHRI RAMAKANT PATEL ALONG WITH ASHISH NAYAK-
                                ADVOCATES)




                                                           ORDER

This second appeal has been filed by the appellants/defendants

challenging the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2021 passed by 7 th District

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 2/17/2023 6:47:46 PM

- 2 -

Judge, Sagar in Civil Appeal No.5/2021, affirming the judgment and decree

dated 13.01.2021 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class II, Sagar in Civil Suit

No.2300042-A/2016, whereby suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for

declaration of title, permanent injunction, mandatory injunction and for

restoration of possession filed against the defendants/appellants in respect of

land area 800 sq.ft. bearing in khasra no.150/60 situated in Patwari Halka

No.66, Tahsil and District Sagar, has been decreed.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned Courts below

have without taking into consideration the documentary and oral evidence

available on record erred in decreeing the suit. He submits that predecessors-in-

title of the respondent had no right to alienate the land more than the area which

they owned and possessed. He further submits that the defendant 2 is owner of

the suit property on the basis of purchase of land by his mother Urmaila

Nijhawan vide registered sale deed dated 12.07.1999 (Ex.P/46), over which a

Tapra of the appellant/defendant 1 Bhagwan Das is situated, in which he is

tenant of the appellant/defendant 2- Atul Nijhawan. Accordingly, he submits

that the second appeal deserves to be admitted.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent supports the impugned

judgment and decree and prays for dismissal of the appeal.

4. Perusal of record as well as concurrent judgment and decree passed by

learned Courts below show that learned Courts below after having considered

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 2/17/2023 6:47:46 PM

- 3 -

the entire oral and documentary evidence, have held that the respondent

/plaintiff is owner of the land area 800 sq.ft which he purchased on the basis of

registered sale deed dated 08.08.2011 (Ex.P/1) from Saraswati Bai and the

predecessor of respondent/plaintiff namely Saraswati Bai purchased the same

plot from Khilan Singh vide registered sale deed dated 25.02.1988 (Ex.P/26).

Apparently, Khilan Singh purchased a plot having an area 2000 sq.ft from Kallu

vide registered sale deed dated 21.01.1981 (Ex.D/2). It is pertinent to mention

here that the acquisition of property by the plaintiff/respondent is prior in time.

5. From perusal of the record and findings recorded by learned Courts

below, in my considered opinion, there is no illegality or perversity in the

impugned judgment and decree passed by learned Courts below.

6. Resultantly, this second appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. However,

no order as to costs.

7. Interim application(s), if any shall stand dismissed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE [email protected]

Signature Not Verified Signed by: S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN Signing time: 2/17/2023 6:47:46 PM