Madhya Pradesh High Court
Basantlal Patel vs Ramnidhi on 28 May, 2024
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 28 th OF MAY, 2024
MISC. PETITION No. 2336 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. BASANTLAL PATEL S/O LATE SHRI JAMUNA
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN, POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. CHHOTELAL S/O LATE SHRI JAMUNA PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN, POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHHOHGI D/O LATE SHRI JAMUNA PATEL W/O
RAMBADAN PATEL, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWORK R/O VILLAGE
CHIRAHULA TEHSIL HUZUR DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. GENDAUA D/O LATE SHRI JAMUNA PATEL W/O
RAMYASH PATEL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWORK R/O VILLAGE
BAMURIHA P.S. AND TEHSIL MAUGANJ DISTRICT
REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI M.P. SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RAMNIDHI S/O LATE SHRI MUNRAJ PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI (MAUGANJ) DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DAYANIDHI PATEL S/O LATE SHRI MUNIRAJ
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI (MAUGANJ) DISTRICT REWA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHALINI
LANDGE
Signing time: 5/29/2024
11:08:41 AM
2
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHATURLAL PATEL S/O LATE SHRI MUNIRAJ
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI (MAUGANJ) DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. GENDLAL PATEL S/O LATE SHRI MUNIRAJ PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI (MAUGANJ) DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. S M T. CHHOTAKIYA D/O LATE SHRI MUNIRAJ
PATEL W/O SHRI JANARDAN PRASAD PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSEWORK R/O VILLAGE CHANDRAMAHULI
TEHSIL MAUGANJ DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. MUNNI DEVI @ MANTI W/O LATE SHRI
CHHOTELAL PATEL, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O
VILLAGE DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION
AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. RAMJIYAWAN PATEL S/O LATE CHHOTELAL
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
8. JAGDISH PRASAD PATEL S/O LATE SHRI
CHHOTELAL PATEL, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O
VILLAGE DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION
AND TEHSIL NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
9. RAMSALONE PATEL S/O LATE CHHOTELAL
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
DEORI BAGHELAN POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL
NAIGARHI DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
10. SMT. KAMLAVATI D/O LATE SHRI CHOTTELAL
PATEL W/O SHRI DADDI @ KESHAV PRASAD
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSEWORK R/O VILLAGE KACHHIGAWAN
TEHSIL RAIPUR KARCHULIYAN DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHALINI
LANDGE
Signing time: 5/29/2024
11:08:41 AM
3
11. DIVANSHU PATEL S/O SHRI DEVENDRA OATEL,
AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, OCCUPATION: (MINOR)
THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER
DEVENDRA SINGH PATEL R/O VILLAGE GAURI
KHATIKAN TOLA TEHSIL HANUMANA DISTRICT
REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
12. SMT. MAMTA D/O LATE CHHOTELAL PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN TEHSIL MAUGANJ DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
13. SHRI NIWAS PATEL S/O LATE SHRI GARUL PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE DEORI
BAGHELAN TEHSIL MAUGANJ DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
14. THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR
REWA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PIYUSH JAIN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.14/STATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 07.02.2024
(Annexure P-7), passed in Case No.130A/2014 by the learned I Civil Judge
Junior Division, Mauganj, District Rewa whereby the application filed by the
petitioners/defendants under Section 10 read with Section 151 of the CPC
seeking stay of the suit was rejected.
2. The case of the petitioners/defendants is that previously their father filed a
suit seeking declaration of title and possession with respect to the land bearing
Khasra No.21, Area 16 decimal with respect to half share and also the land
bearing Khasra No.80 Area 81 decimal situated at Village Deori, Tahsil
Mauganj, District Rewa. On notice being issued, the respondents filed the
written statement was filed. The learned trial Court framed as many as nine
issues and has passed the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2014. The
respondents preferred an appeal bearing regular civil Appeal No.26-A/2014 in
the Court of Second Additional District Judge, Mauganj, District Rewa. The
learned Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 30.07.2014 dismissed
the appeal and has affirmed the judgment passed by the learned trial Court. The
matter was traveled to this Court in a second appeal bearing Second Appeal
No.856/2014. During pendency of the second appeal the respondents filed a
suit before the Court of learned Second Civil Judge Class-II, Mauganj. The
petitioners/defendants filed their written statement. They have also filed an
application under Section 10 read with Section 151 of the CPC to point out that
between the same parties with respect to the same land a civil suit was
previously decided by the learned trial Court which was affirmed by the
appellate court and the second appeal is pending consideration before this
Court.
3. It is argued that all the detailed particulars with respect to the previous lis
was mentioned in the application but despite of the same the learned trial Court
has rejected the application without even asking reply from the
plaintiffs/respondents on the ground that no such documents regarding
pendency of the second appeal has been filed along with the said application.
However, before this Court the relevant documents i.e. the judgments and
decree passed by the trial Court, appellate Court as well as the order sheet of
the second appeal have been placed before this Court. Although these
documents were not filed before the trial Court along with an application.
Therefore, the application was rejected.
4. The fact remains that these documents are relevant and material documents
for proper disposal of the lis in question. If the previous lis between the same
parties with respect to the same land have been decided by the learned trial
Court and the appellate Court and there is no requirement for proceeding in the
matter again. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set
aside the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 whereby the application under
Section 10 read with Section 151 of the CPC has been rejected and remand the
matter back to the learned trial Court to decide the application afresh.
5. The petitioners/defendants are at liberty to file all necessary documents in
support of their application. This direction has been given to do complete
justice between the parties. The petitioners/defendants may appear before the
trial Court and file all necessary documents on the next date of hearing and
thereafter, the trial Court will decide the application on merits.
6. With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed off.
7. A copy of this order be communicated to the trial Court.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
THK
