2026:CGHC:10373 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 546 of 2016 Judgment reserved on 08/12/2025 Judgment delivered on 27/02/2026

1 - Smt. Injoriya W/o Ishwar Dayal, Aged About 45 Years S/o Ramprasad, R/o Village- Baselpur, Chhoti Salhi, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh

2 - Smt. Fuleshwari W/o Shambhu Sahu, Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Amka, Police Station And Tahsil- Khadgawan, District- Korea Chhattisgarh ............Defendants ... Appellants versus

1 - Shivkumar S/o Gangaram, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Tutimar Laad, Tahsil- Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh

2 - Smt. Sewari D/o Gangaram, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village- Bango, Police Station- Bango, Tahsil- Bango, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh ...............Plaintiffs

3 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Collector, Korea, Place At Baikunthpur, District- Korea, Chhattisgarh .................Defendant No.3 ... Respondents (Cause Title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellants : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate VED For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. V.K. Pandey, Advocate PRAKASH DEWANGAN For Respondent No.3/State : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer

VED PRAKASH

DEWANGAN

Date: 2026.02.27

18:02:45 +0530

Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge C.A.V. JUDGMENT

1. The second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by the defendants No. 1 and 2 against the impugned judgment and decree dated 24.09.2016, passed by learned First Additional District Judge, Manendragarh, District Koriya, in Civil Appeal No. 9-A/2015, whereby the first appeal filed by the plaintiffs was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2014, passed by learned Civil Judge Class-1, Chirmiri, District Koriya, in Civil Suit No.

64-A/2011 was set aside.

2. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties is referred to as shown in the civil suit.

3. The second appeal is admitted on 15.05.2017 on the following substantial questions of law:-

“1. Whether the lower appellate court was justified in reversing the finding of the trial Court by holding that the plaintiffs’ have acquired their right, title and interest over the suit property by virtue of the Adhikar Abhilekh (exhibit P-6)?

2. Whether the findings of the trial court dismissing the suit on the point of limitation could be set at naught by the lower appellate court, even without setting aside the said finding?”

4. The plaintiffs had filed a civil suit against the defendants for declaration of title, declaring the sale-deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the defendant No.2 is null and void, possession of the suit property and for permanent injunction over the suit property of khasra No. 11 and 135, area 0.450 and 0.110 hectare respectively, situated at Village Amka, Tahsil Khadgawan, District Koriya. They pleaded in the plaint that the defendant No.1 is the cousin sister of the plaintiffs. The land of khasra No. 11 and 135, area 0.450 and 0.110 hectare (old khasra No. 15/3 and 28) was allotted by the then Madhya Pradesh State Government to the father of the plaintiffs, namely Gangaram by the order dated 13.06.1966, passed by SDO (Revenue), Koriya (Baikunthpur) and since then, the father of the plaintiffs was in possession. Due to the necessity of the family, their father was also earning the lands at village Tutimar Lad. On 16.10.1973, Gangaram was convicted in a criminal case and sentenced to life imprisonment, and during the period of sentence, he gave his land of village Amka to his brother Ramprasad for cultivating in adhiya and the nurture of his minor sons, i.e. the plaintiffs. Ramprasad was cultivating the land and regularly given half share of the crop to the plaintiffs’ family. The mother of the plaintiffs has remarried and gone somewhere else. After being released from jail, the father of the plaintiffs died. Thereafter, Ramprasad stopped giving the share of the crop to the plaintiffs, and by the collusion of the revenue authorities, he got t