NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA No. 323 of 2019 Judgment Reserved on 12/3/2026 J udgment Delivered on_ 19 / 3/2026 Ghanshyam Prasad Dewangan S/o Dukaluram Dewangan, Aged About 57 Years R/o Balauda, Tahsil Balauda, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.................(Plaintiffs)

... Appellant versus

1 - Naresh S/o Kishan Lal Dewangan, Aged About 48 Years

2 - Chandrabhan S/o Sukalu Dewangan, Aged About 58 Years

3 - Krishna Murari S/o Arjunlal Dewangan, Aged About 57 Years

4 – Bodhiram, S/o Mathura Dewangan, Aged About 66 Years

5 - Lagan S/o Narayan Dewangan, Aged About 48 Years

6 - Manharan S/o Jaitram Dewangan, Aged About 58 Years SHYNA AJAY SHYNA AJAY DN: cn=SHYNA AJAY, o=PERSONAL, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN All are R/o Village Balauda, Tahsil Balauda, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

7 - President Nagar Panchayat Balauda, Smt. Jamuna Devi Ratre, Tahsil Balouda, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

8 - Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat Balauda, Pravesh Chand Kashyap, Tahsil Balauda, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

9 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-

Champa, Chhattisgarh...........(Defendants)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Ms. Ankita Goswami, Advocate on behalf of Mr. P.K. Patel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. AG No one appears on behalf of the other defendants despite service of notice.

DB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasa d

C A V JUDGMENT

Amitendra Kishore Prasa d, J .

1. This appeal under Section 96 of the CPC is filed by the plaintiff aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 28.6.2019 passed by the Third Additional District Judge, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) in Civil Suit No.29-A/2017, whereby the plaintiff’s suit for permanent injunction was dismissed by the trial Court.

2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the appellant/plaintiff, are that the appellant/plaintiff instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction in respect of Abadi land bearing Khasra No. 3484/1, area 8.615 hectare. Within this area, the suit property specifically comprises a portion measuring 23 feet in length and 18.9 in width, situated at Village Baloda, Ward No.4, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). The disputed land is the ancestral property of the plaintiff, son of Dulaku Ram Dewangan. The plaintiff is the cultivator and in possession of the said land, which was originally acquired by his father from one Gajraj, son of Devnath Dewangan through a registered sale-deed dated 11.12.1993 (Ex.P/1). Since that date, the plaintiff and his predecessor have remained in continuous and peaceful possession of the suit property. In the year 2006, defendants 1 to 6 attempted to take possession of the land under the pretext of constructing a stage for cultural programme through the Nagar Panchayat, Balauda. The plaintiff objected to this interference and submitted a written complaint to the President of the concerned Nagar Panchayat. It is further contended that defendants 1 to 6 by use of force and with the assistance of the concerned authorities, are attempting to construct a stage for cultural program upon the disputed land. Since suit property is in lawful title and possession of the plaintiff, he was constrained to file the suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from such illegal interference.

3. Defendants 1 to 6 filed their written statement, categorically

denying the material allegations made in the plaint. It was averred that the plaintiff possesses no right, title or interest in the suit property, and therefore, is not entitled to the relief of permanent injunction. Unless and until it is established that the defendants are attempting to encroach upon the plaintiff’s land, a decree for permanent injunction cannot be passed. Since the appellant/ plaintiff has failed to prove that he is the title holder or in lawful possession of the land in question, the defendants cannot be restrained by way of perman