Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (JABALPUR BENCH)
ANJULI PALO, J.
Geeta Singh - Appellant
Versus
Kamla Devi and Ors. - Respondents
S.A. No. 1260 of 2020
Decided On : 01-03-2021
Partition - Property Dispute - MP Land Revenue Code, 1959 - Section 178(A) - 01, 02, 03, 04 - The appellant claimed title over the suit property based on a 'Batwara Pulli' dated 05.02.2006, contending that the properties were partitioned between her and Trilok Singh. However, the Batwara Pulli was not produced before the trial Court. The trial Court held that the appellant has no right in the suit property as a 'successor' which belongs to Trilok Singh. The lower Appellate Court rightly held that under Section 178(A) of the MP Land Revenue Code, she has no right to claim any share in the suit property and gave its finding with regard to the same. The appellant failed to prove her possession over the suit properties. The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant claimed title over the suit property based on a 'Batwara Pulli' dated 05.02.2006, contending that the properties were partitioned between her and Trilok Singh. However, the Batwara Pulli was not produced before the trial Court. The trial Court held that the appellant has no right in the suit property as a 'successor' which belongs to Trilok Singh. The lower Appellate Court rightly held that under Section 178(A) of the MP Land Revenue Code, she has no right to claim any share in the suit property and gave its finding with regard to the same. The appellant failed to prove her possession over the suit properties. The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.
Finding of the Court:
The trial Court held that the appellant has no right in the suit property as a 'successor' which belongs to Trilok Singh. The lower Appellate Court rightly held that under Section 178(A) of the MP Land Revenue Code, she has no right to claim any share in the suit property and gave its finding with regard to the same. The appellant failed to prove her possession over the suit properties. The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.
Issues: The main issues were whether the appellant had legally proved that the suit lands had been allotted to her by Trilok Singh in a partition, whether the right to the appellant to be allotted the suit lands in such partition can be denied to her only on the ground of her not being his blood relative, whether the sale deeds executed by Trilok Singh in favor of the respondents were null and void, and whether the lower Appellate Court had committed an error of law in reversing the finding of the trial Court in holding that the sale deeds executed by Trilok Singh favor of respondents with respect to suit lands were also legal.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant failed to prove her possession over the suit properties. The lower Appellate Court rightly held that under Section 178(A) of the MP Land Revenue Code, she has no right to claim any share in the suit property and gave its finding with regard to the same. The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.
JUDGMENT :
Anjuli Palo, J.
1. This second appeal has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2020, passed by the First Addl. District Judge, Mauganj District Rewa (MP) in Regular Civil Appeals No. 44A/2017 and 40A/2017 arising out of the judgment and decree dated 19.05.2017, passed by the Second Civil Judge, Class II, Mauganj, District Rewa in Civil Suit No. 44A/2013.
2. The appellant/plaintiff's case is that she belongs to the family of Baramdeen Singh and Trilok Singh who are real brothers. In the year 1980, the suit property was mutually partitioned between them including property bearing Khasra No. 464/1 admeasuring 0.12 acre land. 0.06 acre of land was received by both Trilok Singh and Baramdeen Singh individually. Appellant/plaintiff is the daughter of Baramdeen. Trilok Singh had no children therefore, appellant/plaintiff resided with him as his daughter and received his share in the suit property by Batwara Pulli dated 05.02.2006. She contended that since 1982, appellant/plaintiff was in possession of the suit lands and resided in the house situated on Khasra No. 464/1. In the year 2009, Trilok Singh ousted her from the said house and locked the premises. He lodged a complaint against her in the police station. As the suit property was recorded in the name of Trilok Singh, he sold the suit land No. 2 through registered sale deed in favour of respondents No. 2 to 4. Appellant/plaintiff has alleged that she is in possession of the disputed lands, therefore, Trilok Singh has no right to transfer the suit property. Hence, the appellant/plaintiff claimed that the aforesaid sale deeds and mutation of names of respondent No. 2 to 4 over the suit lands be declared null and void. She also prayed for declaration of title over the disputed lands situated at village Sarai Sengar, Tehsil Mauganj, District Rewa bearing Khasra Nos. 447/2, 464/1, 563, 425, 429, 430, 240, 237, 248, 448, 465 total area admeasuring 5.36 acres. She further prayed to declare the mutation order dated 30.09.2010 null and void and issue permanent injunction restraining the interference of the respondents over the aforesaid lands.
3. Respondents denied the appellant's contentions and submitted that, suit property was under the joint possession of Baramdeen Singh and Trilok Singh. Bhaiyyalal Singh was the son of Baramdeen Singh who died in the year 2008 and Baramdeen Singh died in the year 2012. Dharmendra Singh is the son of Bhaiyyalal. The entire property was partitioned between Dharmendra Singh and Trilok Singh on 04.05.2010. Consequently, Trilok Singh received his share in the suit property, therefore, he has the right to transfer his share. Accordingly, he sold his properties to respondents No. 2 to 4. They also contended that appellant has no right in the properties, hence, the appellant is not entitled for any of the relief claimed by her.
4. The suit filed by the appellants has been dismissed by the trial Court holding that the appellant has not proved that any partition has been effected between her and Trilok Singh nor the Batwara Pulli dated 05.02.2006 has been produced by her. Thus, she has no right over the suit properties.
5. A counter claim was filed by the respondents for declaration of exclusive title over the suit lands and for permanent injunction, restraining the plaintiff from interfering with their possession over the same. The counter claim was dismissed by the learned trial Court holding that neither it was proved that Trilok Singh's has any title over the suit land No. 2 nor it was proved that the present appellant created any interference in the possession of respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
6. Aforesaid decree has been challenged by appellant/plaintiff as well as Trilok Singh and respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the first appeal. Learned first Appellate Court passed a common judgment in Civil Appeal No. 40A/2017 and 44A/2017 dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant/plaintiff and a decree was passed in
The appellant failed to prove her possession over the suit properties. The lower Appellate Court rightly held that under Section 178(A) of the MP Land Revenue Code, she has no right to claim any shar....
Concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court are binding unless demonstrated to be perverse; appeals under Section 100 cannot disturb established facts without substantial questio....
A claim of partition in Hindu joint family property must be substantiated with credible evidence; conjecture does not suffice.
A party seeking partition must challenge the validity of prior transactions affecting the property and cannot seek partition of property that has been sold and is in the possession of third parties w....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
