JUDGMENT :

1. The instant Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2012, passed by the Additional District Judge, Mahasamund, in Civil Appeal No. 5-A/2012, whereby the plaintiff's/appellant's appeal has been dismissed affirming the judgment and decree dated 13.02.2009, passed by 1st Civil Judge, Class I, Mahasamund, in Civil Suit No. 4-A/2009. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration that he is entitled to get the title over the suit land by adverse possession and for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants in the suit property.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties hereinafter will be referred as per their status and ranking given in the plaint before the trial Court.

3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that, the plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 5 have properties situated at village Kanpa, P.H. No. 136/83 measuring area about 0.24 hectare. On 05.07.2004, the property was jointly recorded in the revenue record in the name of both the parties. On 04.06.2004, the defendants No.1 to 5 have moved an application for partition in the account before Gram Panchayat thereafter Gram Panchayat has separated the accounts, description has given in paragraph one the plaint which is extract below:-

4. It has been contended that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property bearing Khasra No. 376/4 which was changed as Khasra No. 598 area 0.24 hectare, the plaintiff is in possession of the land for the last 23-24 years which was neither opposed by the defendants nor they have filed civil suit before the competent authority. It has also been contended that the plaintiff is well aware of the fact that suit property belonged to defendant No. 1 to 5, as he was cultivating the land and was resident of same village. The defendants have never objected the possession of plaintiff, as such he acquired title over the suit property, as per the principal of adverse possession and would pray that the plaintiff be declared title holder of suit property situated in village Kanpa, Patwari Halka No. 136/83 now after settlement new khasra No. 376/4 area 0.24 hectare which is again renumbered as khasra No. 598 and the respondent No. 1 to 5 be kindly restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of the suit property.

5. The defendants have filed their written statements denying the plaint averments contending that Gram Panchayat Kanpa vide its order dated 5/7/2004 had directed for partition against that order, they have preferred the appeal before Sub Divisional Officer which is pending as on 21.01.2008. It has also been contended that the suit property belonged to Sakunat Bee, Nazeer Mohammad and Ale Mohammad and their names have also been recorded in the revenue record which has wrongly been partitioned by the Gram Panchayat. Defendants have been further contended that the plaintiff was never in possession of the suit property as the suit property is ancestral property of defendant No. 1 to 4 and would pray for dismissal of the suit. The defendant No. 5 has filed separate written statement denying the allegation made in the plaint and contending that the suit property is ancestral property of defendant no. 1 to 5 and against division of partition vide order dated 05.07.2004 by the village panchayat Kanpa, he has preferred appeal which is pending before SDO, Mahasamund.

6. The plaintiff to substantiate his stand has examined himself as (PW-1), Bholaram (PW-2), Ramnarayan (PW-3), Shyamu (PW-4) and exhibited documents B-1 Kistbandi Khatouni (Ex.P-1), Khasra Panchsala (Ex.P- 2). Defendants examined Habib Khan as (DW-1).

7. Chintaram has examined himself as (PW-1) in the examination-in-chief