Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mst. Mouni Bai @ Nai Bahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 May, 2024
Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
ON THE 28 th OF MAY, 2024
SECOND APPEAL No. 718 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
MST. MOUNI BAI (DEAD) THROUGH HER LEGAL HEIRS
1. PANNALAL, S/O LATE SHRI MAHADEV SONI, AGED
ABOUT 62 YEARS
2. AMRITLAL SONI, S/O LAT SHRI MAHADEV SONI,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEAS
ALL RESIDENTS OF WARD NO. 11, KARHARI, DISTRICT
PANNA (MP)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SANJAY AGRAWAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS. ANKIT
SINGH, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH COLLECTOR
PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NAIB TAHSILDAR REVENUE DEPARTMENT
CIRCLE KAKARHATI, TEHSIL AND DIST. PANNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. NAGAR PANCHAYAT OFFICER/ EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER NAGAR PANCHAYAT KAKARHATI
NAGAR PANCHAYAT KAKARHATI, TEHAIL AND
DIST. PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. PRESIDENT NAGAR PANCHAYAT KAKARHATI
TEHSIL AND DISTT. PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. PANNALAL (DELETED)
6. AMRAT LAL (DELETED)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY KU. KCV RAO, PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT-STATE)
This appeal coming on for admission, this day, th e court passed the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUMARI PALLAVI
SINHA
Signing time: 5/29/2024
6:07:07 PM
2
following:
ORDER
This second appeal has been preferred by the original plaintiff Mst.
Mouni Bai (now dead, through LRs) challenging the judgment & decree dtd.
13.03.2015 passed by 1st Additional Judge to the court of 1st Additional
District Judge, Panna in Civil appeal No. 48A/2014 affirming the judgment &
decree dtd. 04.09.2012 passed by 2nd Civil Judge Class-II, Panna in Civil Suit
No. 30-A/12 whereby plaintiff's suit for declaration of title and permanent
injunction in respect of land bearing survey no. 2092/2-ga area 0.19 acre
situated in Village Kakarhati has been dismissed.
2. Facts in short are that the plaintiff had instituted a civil suit with the
allegations that owner of the land was Ramdas Sonar (died in the year 1966),
who was survived by his son Mahadev Sonar (died in the year 1985). The
plaintiff-Mst. Mouni Bai is wife of Mahadev Sonar, whose sons are present
appellants Pannalal and Amritlal, who were arrayed in the suit as defendants 5 &
6, who after death of appellant/plaintiff-Mst. Mouni Bai during pendency of
second appeal, have been transposed as appellants from defendants 5-6.
Previously, a civil suit was filed by Pannalal and Amritlal claiming themselves to
be owner and in possession of the land on the basis of natural succession in
respect of the same land, which was dismissed by trial court on 30.09.2005,
affirmed in civil appeal on 16.11.2005 as well as in S.A. No. 2627/2006 on
07.08.2006 and thereafter the present/instant (second suit) had been filed by
plaintiff-Mst. Mouni Bai claiming herself to be exclusive owner and in
possession of the suit property by virtue of unregistered Will dtd. 13.07.1961
allegedly executed by Ramdas Sonar, which has also been dismissed by courts
below on the ground of res judicata as well on other grounds.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs submits that land was owned
by Ramdas Sonar, whose name is recorded in the Khasra of the year 1955-56,
therefore, he was having right to execute the Will in favour of the plaintiff. He
further submits that although issue no.4 was framed in respect of plea of res
judicata taken by the defendants/State in the written statement, but the same has
not been proved by defendants by producing relevant pleadings and marking
documents/judgments in the evidence. With these submissions, he submits that
courts below have committed illegality in dismissing the suit and as such,
second appeal be admitted for final hearing.
4 . Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State supports the
impugned impugned judgment & decree and prays for dismissal of the second
appeal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. From bare perusal of copy of judgment & decree dtd. 30.09.2005,
16.11.2005 and order dtd. 07.08.2006 passed by this court in S.A. No.
2627/2006, it is clear that previously a civil suit was filed by Pannalal and
Amritlal in respect of the same land claiming themselves to be owner and in
possession through Ramdas Sonar, but the same was dismissed. Although the
present/second suit was filed by mother of Pannalal and Amritlal on the basis of
Will, but now after death of original plaintiff-Mst. Mouni Bai, her sons i.e.
Pannalal and Amritlal have been transposed as the appellants and the counsel
appearing for the appellants has not been able to point out any illegality in
respect of the decision of issue no.4 framed by trial court on the plea of res
judicata.
7. Although in the khasra of samvat 2012-13 i.e. of the year 1955-56 name of
Ramdas Sonar is mentioned in front of Khasra no.2092 area 0.66 acre, but in
column no.9 of which, entry of banjar is there, meaning thereby prior to coming
into force of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, the land was not under
cultivation. Other entries available on record of the name of State Government
shows that the land being not under personal cultivation of Ramdas Sonar, the
same was vested in the State.
8. In view of the aforesaid factual scenario, both the courts below in
previous suit as well as in the present/instant suit held that Ramdas Sonar was
not owner/bhoomiswami of the land in question and resultantly dismissed the
suit. Both the courts below have also held that the plaintiff who is claiming right
in the suit property on the basis of Will has no right because Ramdas Sonar had
no right over the suit property and dismissed the suit.
9. Upon due consideration of the material available on the record, this court
does not find any illegality in the judgment & decree passed by courts below.
10. Resultantly, for want of any substantial question of law, this second
appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.
11. Miscellaneous application(s), pending if any, shall stand disposed off.
(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE
KPS
