CAV Judgment

1. The substantial question of law formulated and to be answered in the instant defendants' second appeal is as under:

“Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the appellate Court illegally reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court by misreading the evidence and holding that the disputed land belongs to the plaintiffs (respondents herein)?”

2. During pendency of the instant appeal, Respondent 1/plaintif 1 Tetkuram died and, therefore, Respondents 1-A to 1-F, who are legal heirs of Tetkuram are brought on record. Further, defendant

1/Appellant 1 Khorbahara also died during pendency of this appeal and his legal heirs are already on record and, therefore, his name has been deleted from the array of cause title.

3. Facts of the case, in short, are that a suit for declaration, perpetual injunction and possession was fled by Respondents 1 to 3 claiming that the land bearing Khasra No. 888 area 0.10 hectares is ancestral property, which was earlier recorded in the name of their ancestor Ramdayal and after his death it is recorded in the name of Respondents No. 2 and 3 and original Respondent No. 1. However, the Appellants/defendants erected a house over t