JUDGMENT

Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. - This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs to assail the legality, validity and correctness of the trial Court's judgment and decree whereby their suit for declaration of title and ownership over lands and properties in schedule 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E' & 'G' as also for setting aside the sale deeds shown in schedule 'B', 'E' & 'G' of the plaint has been dismissed. Plaintiffs' prayer for possession of the properties in schedule 'A' (including schedule 'B'), 'E' & 'G' and for a decree to set aside the judgment and decree dated 17-2-1978 in civil suit No.2-A of 1978 of the Court of District Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur has also been dismissed by the trial Court.

2. The main contesting parties i.e. original plaintiff Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo now represented by his legal heirs/appellants namely; (1) Smt. Krishna Kumari Devi, (2) Kamal Chandra Bhanjdeo & (3) Ku. Gayatri Devi and the original defendants namely; (1) Smt. Hintendra Kumari Devi, (2) Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo, (3) Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo & (4) Smt. Subhraj Kumari alias Vedvati now represented by the respondents No.1 to 4 namely; (1) Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo, (2) Jyoti Kumari Bhanjdeo, (3) Mohit Chandra Bhanjdeo & (4) Kumari Juhika Bhanjdeo are related to each other as they represent different branches of the Royal family of erstwhile Bastar State. Their relationship and status before the trial Court can be better understood through the following genealogical tree (as mentioned in the memo of appeal) :

Plaintiffs' case:

(as projected in the plaint)

3. The suit land/properties belonged to Bastar State. The Late Maharaja & Ruler of Bastar State Shri Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo signed the merger agreement with the Government of India (for brevity 'the GOI') on 15-12-1947 through an article of agreement merging the Bastar State with the GOI on or about 1-1-1948. Under Article 3 of the agreement Late Maharaja & Ruler was entitled to full ownership and enjoyment of private properties as distinct from State properties belonging to the Maharaja on the date of agreement.

4. On 31-3-1948 an agreement of private properties of Maharaja & Ruler of Bastar State was arrived at between the Maharaja and the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh on behalf of the GOI and all those properties were eventually handed over to Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo.

5. According to the plaintiffs, the private properties were saved from being merged in the GOI, therefore, Shri Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo became owner thereof in the sense that the properties were attached to his position as Maharaja & Ruler and, as such, these private properties was capable of devolution on the next Maharaja. The private properties were not the personal or self acquired properties of an individual Ruler and for the purposes of inheritance and succession are not governed by Hindu Law.

6. Owing to Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo Kaktiya's mental infirmity the Government of Madhya Pradesh issued an order on 20-6-1953, under the approval of the GOI, declaring him to be incapable of managing his estate and the Court of Wards (MP) took charge of all the private properties attached to Maharaja of Bastar. The plaintiffs further pleaded that due to said Maharaja's involvement in subversive activities against the GOI by inciting disorder and rebellion amongst the Tribals of Bastar, an order dated 12-2-1961 was passed by the GOI forfeiting all claims to the continued enjoyment of his position as Maharaja & Ruler of former Bastar State and was deposed by the GOI.

7. On 12-2-1961 Shri Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo, father of the original plaintiff was recognized by the GOI as Maharaja & Ruler of Bastar in place of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo and by the said recognition obtained all the privileges, rights and enjoyment to the ownership of all the private properties belonging to the deposed Maharaja, which were s