2026:CGHC:460 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Judgment Reserved on 14.10.2025 Judgment Delivered on 05. 01 .2026 Judgment Uploaded on 05. 01 .2026 SA No. 127 of 2005 Kariman (Died) Through LR:

1) Balram Rajwade S/o Late Kariman Aged About 58 Years R/o Village- Mayapur, Near Mahamaya Mandir, Ambikapur, Police Station And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja C.G.

... Appellant (s)

versus Jainath (Died) Through LRs:

1 (A) - Bhagwati Rajwade Wd/o Late Jainath Aged About 75 Years

1 (B) - Shriram Rajwade S/o Late Jainath Aged About 58 Years 1 (C) - Shankar Rajwade S/o Late Jainath Aged About 50 Years All above R/o Village- Mayapur, Near Mahamaya Mandir, Ambikapur, Police Station And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja C.G.

2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Collector, Surguja, Ambikapur (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date:

2026.01.05 +0530 __________________________________________________________

For Appellant (s) : Mr. Sandeep Patel, Advocate For Resp No.1 (A) to 1 (C) : Mr. Aditya Kumar Mishra, Advocate For State/Resp No.2 : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer _______________________________________________________

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

CAV Judgment

1. This second appeal is filed by appellant/defendant challenging impugned judgment and decree dated 29.01.2005 passed in Civil Appeal No.02-A/2003 by learned Second Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, District - Sarguja whereby learned first appellate Court set aside the judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court and decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff.

2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that original plaintiff/respondent No.1 filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title and possession of the suit property pleading therein that suit property is his ancestral property upon which defendant has forcefully taken possession and has encroached upon the same. In written statement, defendant therein has pleaded that suit filed by plaintiff is barred by limitation. They are in possession over the suit property since lifetime of their father and by virtue of adverse possession they became owner of suit property. It is also pleaded that plaintiff had filed an application for demarcation of suit property in which it was reported that defendant was in possession of suit property. Demarcation was conducted in the year 1984 however the suit is filed after more than 12 years of demarcation report and therefore suit for possession was barred by limitation. It was also pleaded that there is non-joinder of necessary party. Other children of Bihari Ram (father of original plaintiff) were not impleaded as party to suit and therefore suit is not maintainable in its form. Learned trial Court upon considering pleadings made by respective parties and evidence brought on record has dismissed the suit holding it to be barred by limitation and further recorded a finding that there was non-joinder of necessary party. Judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court was put to challenge by plaintiff in appeal filed under Section 96 of CPC and learned appellate Court by impugned judgment and decree dated 29.01.2005 allowed the appeal recording a finding that suit was filed within time and further recorded a finding that in view of entry made in revenue record in the name of plaintiff of disputed property, plaintiff alone can file suit seeking declaration of title, possession and accordingly allowed the appeal and decreed the suit of plaintiff granting decree of possession and declaration of title and further awarded mesne profit.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned first appellate Court erred in reversing both the findings of learned trial Court that suit was barred by limitation and further suit was not maintainable due to non-joinder of necessary party i.e. other siblings of plaintiff who on the date of filing of suit were alive. He contended that in the plaint, plaintiff himself has pleaded that plaintiff has