Nanhi Bai vs Asha Bai
2023 Latest Caselaw 9386 MP

                                                       1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                             ON THE 22 nd OF JUNE, 2023
                                          SECOND APPEAL No. 1233 of 2018

                          BETWEEN:-
                          NANHI BAI W/O GORELAL MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 64
                          YE A R S , GRAM PIPRA TEHSIL MAIHAR DISTRICT
                          SATNA AT PRESENT RESIDING AT GRAM MAJHIYARI
                          TEHSIL GUNNAUR PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI SAKET MALIK - ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF K.S. JHA -
                          ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    ASHA BAI W/O SHYAM SUNDER CHOUBEY, AGED
                                ABOUT 41 YEARS, GRAM KAUSHALPUR TEHSIL
                                HATA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    USHA BAI W/O RAJESH KUAMR CHATURVEDI,
                                AGED     ABOUT      36    YEARS, GRAM
                                MAGRAILAKHURD TEH. GUNNAR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    RAJESH KUMAR S/O JAGANNATH CHATURVEDI,
                                AGED     ABOUT      41     YEARS, GRAM
                                MAGRAILAKHURD TEH. GUNNAR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          4.    SHIVSHANKAR    S/O   RAJESH   KUMAR
                                CHATURVEDI,  AGED  ABOUT   14 YEARS,
                                OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH GUARDIAN
                                FATHER RAJESH KUMAR CHATURVEDI GRAM
                                MAGRAILAKHURD TEH. GUNNAR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          5.    ABDUL JABBAR S/O ABDUL HAMEED, AGED
                                ABOUT 68 YEARS, HAJARIBAGH HATA TEH. HATA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          6.    SHYAMSUNDAR CHOUBEY S/O HARINARAYAN
                                CHOUBDYE,  AGED  ABOUT    45  YEARS,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DEVESH K
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 6/24/2023
3:02:07 PM
                                                       2
                                KAUSHALPUR TEH. HATA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          7.    DINESH KUMAR FAUJDAR S/O PURUSHOTTAM
                                FA U J D A R NEAR CIVIL COURT HATA TEH.
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          8.    GULJARILAL S/O BHEEPAT PRASAD PATHAK,
                                AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS, GRAM MAGRAILKHURD
                                TEH. GUNNAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          9.    STATE OF M.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR DISTT.
                                PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY MS SEEMA PANDEY - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT - STATE)

                                This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                                ORDER

Heard on admission.

The appellant/plaintiff has filed this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.03.2018 passed in Civil Appeal No.39A/2014 by the I-Additional District Judge, District Panna, affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.08.2011 passed in Civil Suit No.05-A/2010 by III Civil Judge Class II, District Panna (M.P.) also called in question in this Second Appeal.

The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for relief of declaration, partition and separate possession. The trial court after framing the issues has dismissed the suit. The appellate Court has also passed a detail judgment and decree after considering each and every aspect of the matter.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the courts below have wrongly decided the claim of the appellant, hence, it is required to be decided by this Court that whether both the courts have committed any error of law and fact while deciding the claim of the appellant/plaintiff. Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 6/24/2023 3:02:07 PM

F ro m a perusal of the record, it is seen that both the courts have considered the pleadings of the parties and framed the issues on the basis of rival stand. After marshaling the entire evidence, the issues were properly decided by the courts below. There are concurrent findings of fact by both the courts. Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to show that those findings are either contrary to record or perverse. No substantial question of law could be pointed-out which needs adjudication in the present second appeal. In view of the concurrent findings of fact, I find no reason to entertain this appeal.

The Second Appeal being bereft of merit, is hereby dismissed.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE DevS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 6/24/2023 3:02:07 PM