2026:CGHC:2063 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Reserved for Judgment On : 08.10.2025 Judgment Delivered On : 13/01/2026 Judgment Uploaded On : 13/01/2026 SA No. 75 of 2014

1 - Charki Bai, D/o Late Gosla, Aged About 47 Years

2 – Boso, D/o. Late Gosla. Aged About 43 Years

3 – Chamra, S/o. Late Gosla, Aged About 39 Years All are R/o Kalyanpur, Tah. Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja C.G.

--- Appellants versus

1 – Budhram, S/o. Late Nanku, Aged About 51 Years

2 - Dil Bahal, S/o. Late Nanku Died, through : legal heirs-

2(a) - Smt. Rijhu W/o Dilbahal Aged About 60 Years

2(b) - Nandkeshwar S/o Late Dilbahal Aged About 40 Years

2(c) - Jaymangal S/o Late Dilbahal Aged About 30 Years

3 - Sukhdev S/o Late Nanku Aged About 49 Years

4 - Rugtu S/o Late Nanku Aged About 47 Years 5 - Haura S/o Late Budho Aged About 43 Years 6 - Surju S/o Late Bodho Aged About 39 Years All are R/o Rakeli, Tah. Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja C.G.

BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 7 - State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Thru- Collector, Distt. Surguja C.G.

Digitally signed --- Respondents by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN (Cause title is taken from CIS)

____________________________________________________________

For Appellants : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Dubey, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 6 : Shubham Tiwari on behalf of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate For Respondent No.7/State : Mr. Aman Tamboli, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

CAV Judgment

1. This second appeal is filed by the appellants/defendants challenging the legality and sustainability of the impugned judgment and decree dated 25.01.2014, passed by the Third Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Sarguja in Civil Appeal No.82-A/2012, whereby learned Third Additional District Judge has dismissed the appeal filed by appellant/defendants affirming the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2012, passed in Civil Suit No.43-A/2011, whereby learned Civil Judge Class-I, allowed the civil suit filed by the plaintiffs/respondents.

2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that plaintiffs, who are legal representatives of late Nanku Ram and Budhi filed a civil suit seeking relief of declaration of title of the property mentioned in Schedule-A of the plaint situated at village – Rakeli based on family partition/family settlement between their ancestors in the year 1950, they be declared owner of entire property as mentioned in Schedule-A, to pass an order of permanent injunction in favour of plaintiffs over the property as mentioned in Schedule-A and to restrain defendants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the property as mentioned in Schedule-A either by themselves or by their agents or any other person. Pleadings in the plaint are that plaintiffs and defendants are legal heirs of same ancestor late Kundo Uraon. Kundo Uraon was survived by three sons namely Nanku, Gosla and Budhi, who also died. Plaintiffs are legal heirs of Nanku and Budhi whereas defendants are legal heirs of Gosla. Property situated at village Rakeli forming part of Schedule-A is fallen in share of Nanku and Budhi in oral partition made by late Kundo Uraon during his lifetime near bout in the year 1950. Other property situated at village – Kalyanpur was given in partition to Gosla. It was further pleaded that the property as forming part of Schedule-A, B, C & D are the property purchased by income of joint family property during lifetime of late Kundo Uraon. Property forming part of Schedule-A was given in share of Nanku and Budhi and property forming part of Schedule -B, C & D were given in share to Gosla, ancestor of defendants since 1950 i.e. by way of family partition/family arrangements. Nanku and Budhi possessed the property of Schedule-A and Gosla possessed the property of Schedule B, C D during their lifetime and after death of Nanku, Budhi, Gosla, their legal heirs came in possession. The dispute arose in the year 2005 when defendants have whispered about repartition of the properties as mentioned in Schedule-A of the plaint.

3