2025:CGHC:48172 AFR PAWAN KUMAR JHA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally signed by PAWAN FA No. 69 of 2015 KUMAR JHA • Smt. Archana Jain W/o Anil Kumar Jain Aged About 44 Years R/o Plot No.

148 Modal Town, Road No. 2, Bhilai Post Nehru Nagar, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh --- Appellant/Defendant versus • A. L. Prasad S/o Heeralal Sao Aged About 65 Years R/o D/701, Kalpvriksh Gotri, Main Road, Badoda Gujrat, Gujarat ---Respondent/ Plaintiff ____________________________________________________________

For Appellant : Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Kanchan Kalwani, Advocate & Mr. Hrishabh Deo Shukla, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate with Mr. Gyan Prakash Dandekar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Judgment on Board

18.09.2025

1. This first appeal under Section 96 CPC has been filed by defendant assailing the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2015 passed by learned Fourth Additional District Judge, Durg, District Durg (CG) in Civil Suit No. A/1235222/2011, by which the trial Court has allowed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for declaration of title and permanent injunction, declare the plaintiff to be the owner of land bearing Khasra No. 1084/366 measuring 0.01 hectare ie., 1200 sq.ft situated at village Junwani and to injunct the defendant from selling or transferring the said land.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status shown in Civil Suit No. A/1235222/2011 before the trial court.

3. Brief facts of the case as projected by the plaintiff before the Trial Court are as under:

(i) Plaintiff, originally residing in Model Town, Junwani, Bhilai, District Durg, but presently residing in Gujarat, entered into an agreement with the defendant on 11.01.2006 to sell his land bearing Khasra No. 970, admeasuring 0.02 hectares (1200 sq. ft.), situated in Model Town, Junwani, Bhilai. As per the agreement, consideration was fixed, and upon receipt of balance amount, plaintiff executed a registered sale deed dated 06.05.2006 in favour of the defendant for Khasra No. 970 only. The plaintiff submitted Khasra, map of Khasra No. 970 at the time of registration, and execution of sale deed was duly completed.

(ii) The plaintiff later discovered that, apart from Khasra No. 970, the defendant had also got another piece of land, bearing Khasra No. 1084/366, admeasuring 0.02 hectares (Plot No. 103), fraudulently inserted in the sale deed dated 06.05.2006. The plaintiff never agreed to sell, nor executed any deed, or received consideration for land bearing Khasra No. 1084/366. When the plaintiff attempted to deal with Khasra No. 1084/366 in September 2007, he found that the said land stood mutated in the defendant’s name in revenue records, leading him to obtain a certified copy of the sale deed which confirmed the fraudulent inclusion of Khasra No. 1084/366 by the defendant.

(iii) Upon becoming aware of the fraud, plaintiff issued a registered legal notice dated 12.11.2007, served upon defendant on 17.11.2007, asking for return of his land. However, the defendant failed to comply and instead demanded money for reconveyance. Plaintiff, thereafter filed a suit on 15.02.2011 seeking declaration that land bearing Khasra No. 1084/366 to be his property, deletion of the defendant’s name from the revenue records, and a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the disputed land.

4. In written statement filed on behalf of defendant, it is pleaded that an agreement was executed with the plaintiff on 11.01.2006, but denied that only Khasra No. 970 measuring 0.02 hectare was mentioned in the agreement dated 11.01.2006. Plaintiff had shown the land and building to defendant, and the total sale consideration was fixed at ₹ 3,40,000/-. In compliance with the said agreement, plaintiff executed a registered sale deed dated 06.05.2006 in favour of defendant before the Sub-Registrar, Durg. Defendant further admitted