Jiwanlal Kurmi vs Shri Hanumanji
2023 Latest Caselaw 16340 MP

                                                        1
                           IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                            ON THE 5 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                           SECOND APPEAL No. 108 of 2019

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    JIWANLAL KURMI (DEAD) THROUGH LR'S
                                KAMLA DEVI W/O JIWANLAL KURMI, AGED
                          1.A   ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O
                                NAYAGAON, CHITRAKOOT         DISTT. SATNA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                ALOK PATEL, S/O JIWANLAL KURMI,
                                AGED        ABOUT      24  YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                          1.B   B US S I N ES S , R/O NAYAGAON, CHITRAKOOT
                                DISTT. SATNA (M.P)

                                KORILAL PATE, S/O LATE JIWANLAL KURMI,
                                AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
                          1.C   R/O NAYAGAON, CHITRAKOOT DISTT. SATNA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    NAND KISHORE S/O LATE GOKUL PRASAD
                                KURMI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                AGRICULTURIST    NAYAGAON,      TEHSIL,
                                MAJKHGANWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    MOHANLAL KURMI S/O LATE GOKUL PRASAD
                                KURMI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, NAYAGAON,
                                TEHSIL, MAJKHGANWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    KAMTA PRASAD KURMI S/O LATE GOKUL
                                PRASAD KURMI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
                                NAYAGAON, TEHSIL, MAJKHGANWA (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                .....APPELLANTS
                          (BY SHRI AJAY PAL SINGH - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    SHRI HANUMANJI THR. MANAGER RAGHUPATI
                                NARAYAN VILLAGE SITAPUR, TEHSIL KARVI
                                DISTT. CHITRAKUT U.P. (UTTAR PRADESH)

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SATTYENDAR
NAGDEVE
Signing time: 10/6/2023
6:04:43 PM
                                                        2
                          2.    STATE OF M.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR SATNA MP
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI VINOD KUMAR DUBEY - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT 1, SHRI
                          SATISH PATERYA - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT 2 /STATE)

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

This second appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 passed by 7th Additional District Judge, Satna in Civil Appeal No.3400151/2016, affirming the judgment and decree dated 27.10.2016 passed by Civil Judge Class-II, Chitrakut, District

Satna, in Civil Suit No.9-A/2013, whereby plaintiffs/appellants' suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction filed in respect of agricultural land survey no. 692 area 1.839 hectare situated in Mouza Nayagaon, Tahsil Majhgawan, District Satna has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs submits that on the basis of Patta (Ex.P/1) erstwhile owner Pal Dev allotted the land to the plaintiffs' grandfather Ramadheen Kurmi, since then Ramadheen Kurmi and thereafter the plaintiffs are in possession of the suit land and without there being any order passed by competent revenue authority, name of the respondent/defendant 1 was mutated in column 3 of Bhoomiswami rights. Grant of patta in favour of grandfather of the plaintiffs is further supported by the revenue entries (Ex.P/2, Ex.P/3 & Ex.P/4), in column 3 of which, although name of defendant 1 is recorded but at the same time in column 12 of which, the name of plaintiffs' grandfather is also recorded.

3. Learned counsel further submits that although the original Patta has not

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SATTYENDAR NAGDEVE Signing time: 10/6/2023 6:04:43 PM

been placed on record, but the revenue entry (Ex.P/1) is sufficient to presume that Patta was granted in favour of Ramadheen Kurmi. He also submits that because the plaintiffs are in possession of the land since the year 1946-47, therefore, they being in continuous cultivating possession, have acquired title by adverse possession also. He submits that learned Courts below have erred in dismissing the suit without taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter. As such he prays for admission of the second appeal.

4 . Learned counsel for the respondent 1, supports the impugned judgment and decree passed by learned Courts below and prays for dismissal of the second appeal.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6 . Perusal of the plaint shows that the plaintiffs have filed the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction on the basis of Patta allegedly granted to grandfather of plaintiffs namely, Ramadheen Kurmi and have also claimed title on the basis of long possession, however specific plea of adverse possession has not been taken in the plaint.

7. Entire record shows that the plaintiffs have neither produced original Patta nor its certified copy and only revenue entry (Ex.P/1) showing grant of Patta in the name of Ramadheen Kurmi, has been produced, which as against the original Patta (Ex.D/1) granted in favour of the defendant 1, cannot be

accepted.

8. So far as the entry of the name of Ramadheen Kurmi in column 12 of the khasra is concerned, learned Courts below have rightly held that the entry made in column 12 of khasra, does not raise any presumption in favour of the plaintiffs. As such upon due consideration of the entire documentary and oral evidence, learned Courts below have dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs Signature Not Verified Signed by: SATTYENDAR NAGDEVE Signing time: 10/6/2023 6:04:43 PM

recording findings of possession in favour of the defendant 1.

9. Upon perusal of the entire record, this Court does not find any illegality in the findings recorded by learned Courts below. Even otherwise the finding in respect of possession, is a pure finding of fact and is not liable to be interfered in the second appeal.

10. Resultantly, in absence of any substantial question of law, this second appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE SN

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SATTYENDAR NAGDEVE Signing time: 10/6/2023 6:04:43 PM