Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Smt. Nirmala vs Rajendra Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 10111 MP

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 10111 MP
Judgement Date : 10 October, 2025

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Nirmala vs Rajendra Singh on 10 October, 2025

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal
          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51432




                                                                 1                           SA-2693-2022
                              IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                                                  ON THE 10th OF OCTOBER, 2025
                                                 SECOND APPEAL No. 2693 of 2022
                                                  SMT. NIRMALA AND OTHERS
                                                            Versus
                                                 RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                              Shri Akhilesh Kumar Singh - Advocate for the appellants.
                              Ms. Gouri Pathak - Panel Lawyer for respondent 8/State.

                                                                     ORDER

This second appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2022 passed by Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bareli, District Raisen in RCA No.41/2017 affirming the judgment and decree dated 27.09.2017 passed by First Civil Judge Class-II, Udaipura, District Raisen in Civil Suit No.23- A/2012 whereby both the Courts below have concurrently dismissed the original plaintiff - Gopal Singh (Dead) through LRs' suit filed for declaration

of title and permanent injunction.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs submits that the suit land survey no.5/2 area 5.65 acres out of an area 34.27 acres is owned and possessed by the plaintiff, which belonged to Bhawani Singh father of plaintiff and defendants 5 to 8 which came in his share in family partition dated 01.06.1971, however the entire land was got recorded in the revenue record in the name of Mahendra Singh s/o Bhawani Singh and with a view to

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51432

2 SA-2693-2022 save the land from ceiling proceedings, Mahendra Singh s/o Bhawani Singh sold the same to his father-in-law Shankar Singh and his brother Harnam Singh on 18.01.1972 that too without receiving consideration, which being a sham document does not confer any title to them. He submits that after death of Bhawani Singh, his wife Gulab Kali remained in possession of suit land and after her death on 11.06.1996 the partition was effected amongst the plaintiff and defendants 5 to 8 in which each brother got 5.65 acres of land. However, an area 5.02 acre was given to three sisters and one acre was gifted by Bhawani Singh. He submits that Shankar Singh by taking advantage of his name in the revenue record again sold some area of the land to the defendant 4 vide registered sale deed dated 16.06.1999 and rest of the land

remained in their names. He submits that inspite of the aforesaid sale deed, the plaintiff remained in possession, hence he has acquired title by adverse possession also. He further submits that the aforesaid has been proved by the plaintiff by adducing cogent and reliable oral and documentary evidence but, Courts below without taking into consideration the same in its real perspective committed an illegality in dismissing the suit. With these submissions, he prays for admission of the second appeal.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs and perused the record.

4. Undisputedly, the sale deed was executed on 18.01.1972 by Mahendra Singh in favour of Shankar Singh (whose LRs are defendants 1-2) and Harman Singh defendant 3, whereas instant suit was instituted on 23.06.2001. It is well settled that title passes in favour of the vendee

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51432

3 SA-2693-2022 immediately upon due execution and registration of the sale deed.

5. Both the Courts below upon due consideration of the entire material available on record and in view of no challenge to the sale deed for a long period dismissed the suit holding the sale deed in question to be a validly executed document. At the same time both Courts have also found the defendants 1-4 to be in possession of the suit property.

6. Even after arguing at length, learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to point out any illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and decree passed by Courts below.

7. Resultantly, in absence of any substantial question of law, this second appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE

SN

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter