Order on board

04.01.2023

1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2021 passed in Civil Appeal No.39-A/2019, whereby, the learned Appellate Court while affirming the judgment and decree dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Civil Judge Class-I Katghora, District-Korba in Civil Suit No.81-A/2014, has dismissed the appeal.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant/Plaintiff submits that the finding of the Courts below holding that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff was not the owner of the property in question is apparently contrary to law. While referring to the documentary evidence, particularly, Misal Bandobast, marked as Ex.P-3, for the year 1928-29, submits that a bare perusal of it would reveal the fact that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff was shown to be the owner of the property in question. However, while misinterpreting the same, the Courts below have erred in holding that the plaintiff has failed to establish the fact that he acquired the property in question by way of inheritance.

3. I have heard, learned counsel