Halkeveer Moghia vs Ram Singh
2023 Latest Caselaw 15538 MP

                                                              1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        SA No. 2025 of 2019
                                               (HALKEVEER MOGHIA Vs RAM SINGH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 21-09-2023
                                 Shri J.L. Soni - Advocate for the appellant.

                                 Ms. Seema Sahu - Advocate for the respondent No.3/State.

The learned Civil Judge Class I, Pipariya, District Hoshangabad in Civil Suit No.11-A/2007 (Munnalal and anr. v. Ramsingh Moghia and ors.) by judgment and decree dated 28.08.2015 has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.

The learned appellate court in Civil Appeal No.57/2015 by judgment dated 23.04.2019 dismissed the appeal.

Heard on admission.

Record is received.

The appeal is admitted on following substantial questions of law : -

i . When the Courts below found that the suit property is undivided property of the plaintiff/appellant, his father and brothers, therefore, the transfer of part of the property by respondent No. 1 to respondent No. 2 ought to have been held to

be invalid to the extent of the share of the plaintiff?

i i . Whether the learned lower Appellate Court wrongly rejected the application of he plaintiff/appellant under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC when the plaintiff appellant specifically pleaded that the document was not in his possession, therefore, there was sufficient reason fro not filing the same before the Trial Court. Therefore, the rejection of the application is illegal and perverse?

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINAY KUMAR VERMA Signing time: 23-09-2023 12:15:02

iii. Whether the learned Courts below wrongly held that the plaintiff/appellant do not belong to Scheduled Tribe Community when the Certificate issued by the Competent Authority declaring th e plaintiff/appellant belongs to Tribal Community, the learned Courts below ought to have been held the appellant and his brother belongs to Tribal Community. Therefore, the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in favour of respondent No. 2 ought to have been held to be null and void?

Issue notice of this appeal and aforesaid substantial questions of law to the respondents on payment of PF within seven working days by RAD mode,

returnable within six weeks.

List after six weeks.

In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to maintain status quo regarding the suit property, till the next date of hearing.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

vkv /-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINAY KUMAR VERMA Signing time: 23-09-2023 12:15:02