SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 4501

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
TOPLAL – Appellant
Versus
LALIT – Respondent
SA/178/2021



2026:CGHC:2713 D si i g g n it e a d l l b y y NAFR SHOAIBS A H N O W A A I R B ANWAR Date:

2026.01.19 17:35:42 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 178 of 2021

1 - Toplal S/o Late Ramadhar Aged About 35 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 2 - Vidhyadhar S/o Late Jhanakram Aged About 57 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

3 - Sushil S/o Late Jhanakram Aged About 54 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 4 - Bhuska S/o Late Jhanakram Aged About 51 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 5 - Neera Bai D/o Late Jhanakram Aged About 59 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Mundha, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

6 - Jagatpal S/o Roopanand Aged About 26 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya, Tehsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

7 - Makardhwaj S/o Roopanand Aged About 23 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya, Tehsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

8 - Puranmoti W/o Late Jhanakram Aged About 84 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya, Tehsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus

1 - Lalit S/o Late Ujal Aged About 59 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya Tehsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Kalash D/o Late Ujal Aged About 57 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Kodoguda, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

3 - Smt. Dasomati D/o Late Ujal Aged About 55 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Raksha, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

4 - Sadhaano D/o Late Ujal Aged About 49 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Koyalaridih, Tehsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 5 - Sukomati W/o Late Ujal Aged About 79 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

6 - Baiga S/o Late Punitram Aged About 69 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Bichiya, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

7 - Munu S/o Late Punitram Aged About 42 Years Caste Aghariya, R/o Village Udela, Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh

8 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

(Cause title taken from CIS)

For Appellants : Shri Palaash Jha, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Shri Anand Gupta, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge

Order on Board

16.01.2026

1. By the present appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, the appellants/defendants challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 16.03.2021 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge, Saraipali Distt- Mahasamund (C.G.) in Civil Appeal No. 20-A/2016 (Toplal & Others vs. Lalit & Others) arising out of the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2016 passed by the learned First Additional Civil Judge, Class- II, Mahasamund Distt- Mahasamund (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 55-A/2014 (Lalit & Others Vs. Toplal & Others). For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred as per their status before the learned trial Court.

2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for injunction, declaration, partition, and possession in respect of Khasra No. 513/3 admeasuring 0.10 hectare, situated at Patwari Halka No. 4/18, Revenue Nirman Mandal Bhavarpur, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.), contending that the suit land was purchased on 23.03.1965 by Gunsay, son of Late Punit Ram, through a registered sale deed for a consideration of Rs. 500/- and that Gunsay died issueless without executing any Will; it is their case that Late Punit Ram, the grandfather of the parties, had distributed his lands among his five sons, and though Gunsay independently purchased the suit land, the defendants No. 1 to 8, behind the back of the plaintiffs and without following mandatory legal procedure, fraudulently got their names mutated in the revenue records vide order dated 20.12.2009 recorded in Sheet No. 26, despite defendants

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top