Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dhannalal vs Mannalal on 29 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 29th OF MAY, 2024
SECOND APPEAL No. 1280 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
DHANNALAL S/O RAMLAL JI, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: VYAPAR AVM KRISHI KUMHARO KA
1.
MOHALLA, PARA TANDA ROAD, VILLAGE BORI, TEHSIL
JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHAMBULAL S/O RAMLAL JI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: RETIRED AND AGRICULTURE KUMHARO KA
2.
MOHALLA, PARA TANDA ROAD, VILLAGE BORI, TEHSIL
JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
SMT. SAROJBAI W/O SHANKARLAL JI, AGED ABOUT 32
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWORK, BUSINESS,
3. AGRICULTURE KUMHARO KA MOHALLA, PARA TANDA
ROAD, VILLAGE BORI, TEHSIL JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
HEMENDRA S/O SHANKARLAL JI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
KUMHARO KA MOHALLA, PARA TANDA ROAD, VILLAGE
4.
BORI, TEHSIL JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
SMT. SAROJBAI W/O BABULAL JI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
KUMHARO KA MOHALLA, PARA TANDA ROAD, VILLAGE
5.
BORI, TEHSIL JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
THAKUR S/O SHRI RAMLAL JI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, JAIN
6. MOHALLA GRAM BORI TEHSIL JOBAT DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS
(SHRI RISHI AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
1. MANNALAL S/O RAMALAL JI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: NONE KUMHARO KA MOHALLA, PARA TANDA
2
ROAD, VILLAGE BORI, TEHSIL JOBAT, DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH COLLECTOR,
2.
DISTRICT ALIRAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS
(NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS)
This appeal coming on for orders this day, the court passed
the following:-
ORDER
Appellants/plaintiffs have preferred this second appeal
under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the
judgment and decree dated 16.06.2020 passed by Additional
District Judge, Jobat, District Alirajpur (MP) in Regular Civil
Appeal No.2A/2020 arising out of the judgment and decree
dated 20.12.2019 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.90A/2018 by
Additional Civil Judge, Class-I, Jobat, District Alirajpur (MP)
by which the appellate court has affirmed the judgment and
decree passed by the trial court and has dismissed the appeal
filed by the plaintiffs.
(2) The brief facts of the case are that the appellants/plaintiffs
have filed the civil suit for declaration of title and permanent
injunction against the respondents in relation to the agricultural
land bearing survey No.22, Rakba 0.800 hectares situated at
Gram Kadwalbadi, Tehsil Jobat, District Alirajpur and has
pleaded that plaintiff No.1 and defendant No.1 are real brothers
and the suit land was the joint property of plaintiff and
defendant but the defendant No.1 has hatched conspiracy with
the Revenue Officer in order to mutate the name of suit land in
the revenue records and thereafter the defendant No.1 has tried
to sold out the suit property and therefore the plaintiffs have
filed the civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction
against the defendants.
(3) The defendants have filed their written statement and has
submitted that the suit land was on lease on 1970 and thereafter
he was the title holder of the suit land and has stated that the
plaintiffs have no right over the suit land and prays for dismissal
of the suit.
(4) The trial court has framed the issue and on the basis of
pleadings of both the parties and after recording the evidence of
both the parties have dismissed the suit.
(5) Being aggrieved from the aforesaid judgment and decree,
the appellants/plaintiffs had filed the appeal before the first
appellate court and the first appellate has dismissed the appeal
filed by the plaintiffs 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/plaintiffs. Thus, on the basis of
above grounds, substantial question of law arises for
consideration in the second appeal and prays that appeal be
admitted for final hearing.
(6) I have heard counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs and have
perused the records of the case with due care.
(7) From the perusal of record of trial court, it appears that the
plaintiffs have filed the civil suit for declaration and permanent
injunction and therefore the burden lies upon the plaintiffs to
prove their case that they are the owners of the suit property.
(8) On going through the record of trial court and evidence, it
was found that the plaintiffs were unable to adduce substantial
evidence that the suit property was previously in the name of
their father and thereafter the name of plaintiff No.1 and
defendant No.1 was recorded in the revenue record and that the
plaintiff has substantially unable to adduce any evidence that the
defendants have wrongly mentioned the name in the revenue
record, so on perusal of evidence adduced before the trial court,
it was found that the plaintiffs have failed to prove that
defendant No.1 was the joint owner of the suit property and
therefore on the basis of documents adduced before the trial
court, the trial court as well as the first appellate court had given
concurrent findings that the appellants/plaintiffs have failed to
prove their joint ownership on the suit property.
(9) 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/plaintiffs 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.
(10) Accordingly, the present second appeal sans merit and is
hereby dismissed.
(11) Certified copy, as per Rules.
(HIRDESH)
Arun/- JUDGE
ARUN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
2.5.4.20=d5b56e3de75e7828ced1a96bc4f
01804c3ea1f0a5497e4019e41c0a82cbabbf
NAIR
0, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya
Pradesh,
serialNumber=192F2423E128DC1CC004D
D8FF22B3F2FFC3D1EF75981FCBEF3B2B76
823F270F7, cn=ARUN NAIR
Date: 2024.05.30 15:58:30 +05'30'
