Abhay M. Naik,J.

( 1. ) This judgment disposes of S.A.No.253/07 and S.A.No.362/07. since they arise from common suit and common judgment and decree passed in the matter.

( 2. ) Facts relevant for the purpose of both the appeals emerging from the material on record are that there situated an agricultural land in village Sesai,Tahsil Kolaras,District Shivpuri comprised in survey No.1706 in area 0.08 hectare, survey No.1707 in area 0.53 hectare, survey No.1709 in area 0.66 hectare and survey No.1710 in area 0.66 hectare which was owned by Raghuvar and Baldeva having 1/3rd share each and Babulal and Ramcharan having l/3rd share. Suit is in respect of the aforesaid land except survey No. 1709.Baldevas l/3rd share was purchased by Hariram through legal heirs of the former vide registered sale deed dated 26-02-1988(Ex-D/1).Plaintiff, Dr. Omprakash purchasedthe suit land from Raghuvar,legal heirs of Baldeva,Babulal and Ramcharan vide registered sale deed dated 17-03-1992 (Ex-P/2). There occurred a partition between Raghuvar,Babulal,Ramcharan and legal heirs of Hariram on 10-02-2000 through revenue Court as is revealed in Ex-D/3.Sunil Kumar,original defendant No.18 (appellant of S.A.No.253/07) purchased the land comprised in survey No. 1706, 1707 and 1709/min 1 from legal heirs of Hariram vide registered sale deed dated 14-08-2002 (Ex-D/5) Smt. Kusum Bai,original defendant No.17 purchased the share of Babu alias Babulal vide registered sale deed dated 10-09-02 (Ex-D/6), land comprised in survey No. 1709/min in area 0.62 hectare and survey No. 1710 in area 0.66 hectare from Babu alias Babulal.

( 3. ) Plaintiff. Dr Omprakash instituted a suit in respect of the land comprised in survey No 1706 in area 0.08 hectare, survey No.1707 in area 0.53 hectare and survey No. 1710 in area 0.66 hectare, totally in area 1.27 hectare for declaration of title and restoration of possession with allegation that he has purchased 1.16 hectare land out of the suit land vide registered sale deed dated 17-03-1992 (Ex-P/2)for a consideration of Rs.20.000/-. Remaining area to the extent of 0.11 hectare is also purchased by the plaintiff from Sirnam (defendant No.4). Thus,plaintiff has become sole Bhumiswamj of the suit land. On 22-09-03 he came to know that the disputed land is recorded in the names of defendants No.17 and 18, and their names were already entered in the record of rights. His contention is that the suit land having been purchased by him in due manner, the land could not have been mutated in favour of defendants No.17 and 18, hence, he sought declaration of title in his favour. He further prayed that if defendants are found in possession, decree for restoration of possession be also granted.

( 4. ) Defendants No.1 to 3 and 7 submitted their joint written statement and virtually accepted the claim of plaintiff. They further admitted to have sold the suit land to the plaintiff vide Ex-P/2 dated 17-03-1992. Defendant No.5(Shanti Bai D/o Baldeva)submitted her written statement. She denied to have executed the alleged registered sale deed dated 17-03-1992 in favour of plaintiff. She further opposed the suit on the ground of limitation. Defendant No.14(Shashi Bai Wd/o Hariram) and defendant No.16(Himanshu S/o Hariram) submitted their joint written statement. They inter alia stated that their predecessor, namely, Hariram had purchased l/3rd share from legal heirs of Baldeva vide registered sale deed dated 26-02-1988 and then obtained its possession, therefore, legal heirs of Baldeva had no right to execute the sale deed in respect of Baldevas share vide registered sale deed dated 17-03-1992. It is further stated that legal heirs of Hariram further transferred the land, purchased by Hariram from Baldevas heirs to Sunil Kumar(defendant No. 18) vide registered sale deed dated 14-08-02. Defendant No. 17(Smt. Kusum Bai) submitted her separate written statement, alleging therein that Babulal had not sold his share to the plaintiff. On the contrary,defendan