Jagdish Singh vs Raghvendra Singh
2023 Latest Caselaw 9403 MP

                           1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                               BEFORE
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                      ON THE 22th OF JUNE, 2023

                  SECOND APPEAL NO.256 OF 2020

      Between:-

      JAGDISH SINGH S/O MAJBOT SINGH
      THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
      OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILL.
      CHACHWALI THE. NIWADI DIST.
      TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)



                                                  ..............APPELLANT


      (BY SHRI NAVENEET DUBEY, ADVOCATE)


AND
1.    RAGHVENDRA SINGH S/O MAJBOT
      SINGH THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 45
      YEARS, VILL. CHACHWALI TEH.
      NIWADI DIST. TIKAMGARH (MADHYA
      PRADESH)
2.    SMT. RAMKUMARI W/O MAHESH
      PRASAD KURMI, AGED ABOUT 43
      YEARS, VILLAGE CHACHWALI TEH.
      NIWADI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.    SMT.    GAYATRI    W/O     SHRI
      RAGHVENDRA SINGH THAKUR, AGED
      ABOUT    41   YEARS,   VILLAGE
      CHACHWALI TEH. NIWADI (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

4.    STATE    OF   M.P.     THROUGH
      COLLECTOR DISTT.     TIKAMGARH
      (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                       2




5.     SMT. RAMDULARI W/O LATE SHRI
       MAJBOT SINGH THAKUR, AGED
       ABOUT    83  YEARS,    VILLAGE
       CHACHWALI TEH. NIWADI (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

6.     SMT. MANKUWAR D/O LATE SHRI
       MAJBOT SINGH THAKUR VILLAGE
       BUDHAI   POST    REWAN     TEH.
       MAURANIPUR (UTTAR PRADESH)

7.     SMT. MANKUWAR D/O LATE SHRI
       MAJBOT SINGH THAKUR RACHPURA
       POST MATAUL TEH. PALERA (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

8.     SMT. PUKKHAN DEVI W/O SHRI
       MAJBOT SINGH JALAPURA POST
       KHADURA TEH. GARAUTHA (UTTAR
       PRADESH)

9.     DIPENDRA S/O SHRI PHOOLKUWAR
       KALYAN SINGH THAKUR VAKRAN
       POST NOTA TEH. TAHRAULI (UTTAR
       PRADESH)

10.    PUSHPENDRA    SINGH   S/O   SHRI
       PHOOLKUWAR      KALYAN    SINGH
       THAKUR VAKRAN POST NOTA TEH.
       TAHRAULI (UTTAR PRADESH)

11.    SMT. VIMLESH D/O SHRI MAJBOT
       SINGH GOUHARA POST GOUHARA
       TEH. MAURANIPUR (UTTAR PRADESH)


                                                                ............RESPONDENTS

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This appeal coming on for admission this day, the Court passed the
following:
                                  3




                                     ORDER

This second appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs challenging the judgment and decree dated 14.11.2019 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge, Niwari, District Tikamgarh in R.C.A. No.107/2014, affirming the judgment and decree dated 28/04/2014 passed by Civil Judge Class-I, Niwari District Tikamgarh in Civil Suit No.44-A/2008, whereby learned Courts below have dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for declaration of title, for declaring the order dated 25.06.2008 passed by Naib Tehsildar to be illegal and that the sale deed dated 30.06.2008 executed by defendant 1 in favour of defendant 2 does not confer any right on the defendant 2, has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff submits that the land survey No.70 area 0.825 hectare belonged to father Majboot Singh Thakur and the appellant/plaintiff being son, is having ½ share in the land and the order passed by the Naib Tehsildar mutating the name of defendant 1 over the entire area is illegal and on that basis the sale deed executed by defendant 1 in favour of the defendant 2 is not binding on the plaintiff and the sale deed does not confer any right on the defendant 2. He submits that the learned Courts below have without considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter have erred in dismissing the civil suit filed by the plaintiff.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff and perused the record.

4. Learned Courts below on the basis of material available on record have held that although the disputed land survey No.70 area 0.825 belonged to father of the plaintiff but there were two survey numbers 70 and 15 area 0.943 hectare and the plaintiff- Jagdish Singh (P/W-1) himself in para 6 has admitted that the land of survey No.15 is in his possession on the basis of previous partition, in

which the land survey No.15 fell in his share, area of which is equivalent to survey No.70.

5. Upon perusal of the para 6 of the statement of plaintiff-Jagdish Singh, the findings recorded by learned Courts below do not appear to be illegal or perverse. In fact, originally the plaintiff has suppressed this fact which has come in his evidence. It is well settled that admission is best piece of evidence and the facts which are admitted need not be proved.

6. In view of the aforesaid admission of the plaintiff himself, the learned Courts below do not appear to have committed any illegality in dismissing the suit

7. Resultantly, this second appeal having no substantial question of law involved, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.

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

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE Digitally signed by ANUPRIYA SHARMA

ANUPRIYA CHOUBEY DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya

SHARMA Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=39fa4048c7a93442ff8e79347e51ed0f6 f655c64cb6d99dcf7a36d69ef167878, pseudonym=2142156D91516ACA40F2291D4F F91E27E57BADA8,

CHOUBEY serialNumber=04B33FA62D9E8571AA55F602E A8D77DCFCFCE3A6B69011155705CFD2CEC5B 118, cn=ANUPRIYA SHARMA CHOUBEY Date: 2023.06.23 10:55:52 +05'30'