Ashish Kumar Goutam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 15964 MP

                                                            1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                             ON THE 26 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
                                              SECOND APPEAL No. 830 of 2018

                           BETWEEN:-
                           ASHISH KUMAR GOUTAM S/O BHAGWATSARAN
                           GOUTAM GANDHI GRAM TEH. JATARA, DISTRICT
                           TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                           (BY SHRI BHANU PRATAP YADAV WITH SHRI AVINASH ZARGAR -
                           ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROGUH
                           COLLECTOR TIKAMGARH, DISTRICT TIKAMGARH
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI SATISH PATERIYA - PANEL LAWYER)

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

This second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 19.02.2018 passed by First Additional District Judge, Jatara, District Tikamgarh in Regular Civil Appeal No.29/2017 affirming the judgment and decree dated 10.07.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge Class-II, Jatara, Distt. Tikamgarh in Civil Suit No.51- A/2016 whereby suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction filed in respect of land khasra No.274/1 area 2.477 hectares situated in village Kitakheda, Mouja Gandhigram, Tahsil Jatara, District Tikamgarh, has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: APARNA TIWARI Signing time: 9/27/2023 2:11:39 PM

dismissed by learned Courts below.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant, by inviting attention of this Court to the pleadings made in para 3 of plaint and written statement, submits that in fact title of plaintiff over the land in question was an admitted fact, therefore, no specific issue was framed by learned trial Court with regard to title of plaintiff's grandfather-Heeralal and resultantly, no documentary evidence was produced by the plaintiff to prove title of Heeralal.

3. He submits that learned trial Court decreed the suit with the observation that title of late Heeralal Gautam is an admitted fact but learned first appellate Court without there being any rebuttal evidence, has erred in reversing the judgment

and decree of trial Court and in dismissing the suit. Learned counsel further submits that learned first appellate Court has also erred in reversing the findings in respect of execution of Will dated 15.07.1984 (Ex.P/1) executed by grandfather Heeralal in favour of the plaintiff Ashish Kumar. With the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff prays for admission of the second appeal.

4 . Learned counsel appearing for the respondent supports the impugned judgment and decree passed by first appellate Court and prays for dismissal of second appeal.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. In the present case, the plaintiff has come with the case that he is Bhumiswami and in possession of the land Khasra No.274/1 area 2.477 hectares. Although in paras 1 and 3 of the written statement, the defendant-State has not denied title of the plaintiff specifically, but in para 12 of the written statement, it has been contended that the land of Khasra No.274/1 area 2.477 hectares belongs to the State Government and is recorded as Ab a d i and Signature Not Verified Signed by: APARNA TIWARI Signing time: 9/27/2023 2:11:39 PM

Gauthan in the revenue papers. In view of this clear plea taken in para 12 of the written statement, it can very well be said that title of the plaintiff was disputed by the defendant-State.

7 . With regard to title of the plaintiff over the land in question, learned trial Court framed two issues and with a view to prove these issues, the plaintiff has filed khasra entry of the year 2015-2016 (Ex.P/6) in column no.3 of which the disputed land has been recorded as Government land. Another revenue entry of the year 1986-1987 (Ex.P/11) has also been placed on record. It is well settled that mere revenue entry cannot be considered as a document of title.

8. Learned first appellate Court after taking into consideration the entire material available on record including the documentary evidence, has come to conclusion that the plaintiff has failed to prove his title over the land in question as well as the execution of Will in question.

9. Upon perusal of the entire record, in the considered opinion of this Court, the findings recorded by first appellate Court do not appear to be perverse or illegal.

1 0 . Resultantly, in absence of any substantial question of law, the second appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

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

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE AT

Signature Not Verified Signed by: APARNA TIWARI Signing time: 9/27/2023 2:11:39 PM