Smt. Leelabai vs Ganpat
2024 Latest Caselaw 13315 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Leelabai vs Ganpat on 9 May, 2024

Author: Hirdesh

Bench: Hirdesh

                                                        1

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT I N D O R E
                                                    BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH

                                             ON THE 9th OF MAY, 2024

                                           SECOND APPEAL No. 03 of 2019

                         BETWEEN:-
                            SMT. LEELABAI W/O SHRI HARISINGH SONDHYA, AGED
                         1. ABOUT 46 YEARS, GRAM SEMLIKALA, TEHSIL KHILCHIPUR,
                            DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
                            ISHWAR SINGH S/O HARI SINGH SHOUDHYA, AGED ABOUT
                         2. 29 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE SEMLEKALA, TEHSIL KHILCHIPUR
                            DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
                            SHIV SINGH S/O HARI SINGH SOUDHYA, AGED ABOUT 35
                         3. YEARS, R/O VILLAGE SHRIPURA, TEHSIL KHILCHIPUR
                            DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                       .....APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS
                         (MS. SOUMYA PATHAK, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)

                         AND
                         GANPAT S/O GOPAL VERMA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, GRAM
                         SEMLIKALA, TEHSIL KHILCHIPUR, DISTRICT RAJGARH
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                            .....RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
                         (NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT)
                               This appeal coming on for orders this day, the court passed
                         the following:-

                                                    ORDER

Appellants/defendants have preferred this second appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.2018 passed by District Judge, District Rajgarh (Biaora) (MP) in Regular Civil Appeal No.04-

A/2018 arising out of the judgment and decree dated 06.01.2018 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.25-A/2017 by Civil Judge, Class-I, Rajgarh (Biaora), by which the appellate court has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and has dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants.

(2) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff has filed the civil suit for permanent injunction against the appellants/defendants in survey no.559/135/1, rakba 0.483 lagaan 2.45 paise, the land situated at Village Khilchipur, District Rajgarh (Biaora) (MP) by stating that the plaintiff is the owner of agricultural land bearing survey no.559/135/1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'agricultural land'). The said property was recorded in the name of plaintiff in the revenue record. On 05.01.2017, the appellants/defendants brought the JCB Machine and started digging the pit and when the plaintiff restrain the defendants they threatened them that they will grab the land. Thereafter the respondent/plaintiff has filed the civil suit against the defendants for permanent injunction.

(3) The appellants/defendants had filed the written statement and denied all the averments made in the plaint and has submitted that the plaintiff has not filed any map as per Order 7 Rule 3 CPC and has stated that the defendants are title holder of survey no.559/135/1 and that there is no relation between him and the plaintiff and prays for dismissal of the suit.

(4) The trial court has framed the issue and after recording the

evidence of both the parties had decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff.

(5) Being aggrieved from the aforesaid judgment and decree, the appellants/defendants has filed the appeal before the first appellate court and the first appellate had dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants and has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. He further submits that both the courts below have committed grave error in dismissing the suit and appeal filed by the appellants/defendants. Thus, on the basis of above grounds, substantial question of law arises for consideration in second appeal and prays that appeal be admitted for final hearing.

(6) I have heard counsel for the appellants/defendants and have perused the records of the case with due care.

(7) From the perusal of records of both the courts below, it is apparent that it is a case of concurrent findings of facts i.e. both the Courts below have dismissed the suit/appeal filed by the appellants/defendants.

(8) On going through the trial court record, it appears that the plaintiff had filed the civil suit for permanent injunction for the suit land against the defendants and pleaded that he is the title holder of the suit property and the defendants are trying to dispossess him.

(9) On seeing the documents it was found that the defendants filed the appeal on the ground that the plaintiff has not filed any

plaint according to Order 7 Rule 3 CPC but on perusal of the plaint, survey number as well as rakba, it is clear that the plaintiff filed the suit as per Order 7 Rule 3 CPC and hence the argument of defendants have no substance.

(10) Thus, in view of aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned judgments passed by trial court and first appellate court are well reasoned and based upon the due appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence available on record. The findings recorded by trial court and first appellate court are concurrent findings of facts. The appellants/defendants have failed to show that how the findings of facts recorded by trial court and first appellate court are illegal, perverse and based on no evidence. Thus, no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present second appeal.

(11) Accordingly, the present second appeal sans merit and is hereby dismissed.

(12) Certified copy, as per Rules.

                                                                                   (HIRDESH)
                         Arun/-                                                      JUDGE