Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
2026:CGHC:19765
SA No. 647 of 2003
1 - Ramjanak S/o Devdhari Aged About 38 Years Caste Harijan (Chamar) Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Sarna, Tahsil Wadrafnagar Distt. Surguja Chhattisgarh
2 - Manikchand S/o Devdhari Aged About 27 Years Caste Harijan (Chamar) Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Sarna, Tahsil Wadrafnagar Distt. Surguja Chhattisgarh
... Appellants
versus
1 - Mohd.Kasim (Dead Through Lrs) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 30-11-2018 And 14-01-2025
1.1 - Sunnat Nisha (Died And Deleted) As Per Court Order Dated 25-11-2025.
1.2 - Mohd. Zaharuddin (Died And Deleted) As Per Court Order Dated 25.11.2025, Through Lrs
1.2.1 - Jumratan Nisha W/o Late Mohammad Zaharuddin Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
1.2.2 - Jakki-Ullah S/o Late Mohammad Zaharuddin Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
1.2.3 - Navi-Ullah S/o Late Mohammad Zaharuddin Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
1.2.4 - Nasim-Ullah S/o Late Mohammad Zaharuddin Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
1.2.5 - Tarikun Nisha D/o Late Mohammad Zaharuddin Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
1.3 - Smt. Hadisun D/o Late Mohd Kasim Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Bhawar, P.S. Babhani, Distt - Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
1.4 - Smt. Tarikun D/o Late Mohd Kasim Aged About 45 Years R/o Village - Asnahar, P.S. Babhani, Distt. Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
1.5 - Smt. Rashida Khatoon D/o Late Mohd Kasim Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
2 - Mohd Yasin S/o Late Abdul Mazid Aged About 53 Years Muslim, Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Sarna, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, Paul, District Surguja Chhattisgarh
3 - Mohd. Ali S/o Late Mohd. Raffique Aged About 27 Years Caste Muslim, Agriculturist And R/o Village Asanhar, P.S. Babhani, Tahsil Dudhi, Distt. Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
4 - Mohd Sameed Ali S/o Late Mohd Raffique Aged About 24 Years Caste Muslim, Agriculturist And R/o Village Asanhar, P.S. Babhani, Tahsil Dudhi, Distt. Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
5 - Smt. Vaisran Wd/o Late Mohd. Raffique Aged About 60 Years Agriculturist And R/o Village Asanhar, P.S. Babhani, Tahsil Dudhi, Distt. Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
6 - Mohd. Zamruddin S/o Usman Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Ashahhar, P.S. Babhani, Tahsil Dudhi, Distt. Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh
7 - Mohd. Hasim (Dead Through Lrs) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 30-11-2018 And 14-01-2025
7.1 - Gulbahar S/o Late Mohd. Hasim Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. - Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
7.2 - Gulzar S/o Late Mohd. Hasim Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. - Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
7.3 - Smt. Sonafun D/o Late Mohd. Hasim, W/o Munna Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. - Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
7.4 - Smt. Zamirun (Died) Through Lrs As Per Honble Court Order Dated 28-01-2026
7.4.1 - Mohammad Hasnain S/o Islam Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Barwatola, Ward And Post Duddhi, Sonbhadra, District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh
7.4.2 - Mohammad Nasim S/o Hasnain Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Barwatola, Ward And Post Duddhi, Sonbhadra, District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh
7.4.3 - C. Sakina Bano D/o Hasnain Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Barwatola, Ward And Post Duddhi, Sonbhadra, District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh
7.5 - Smt. Sitare D/o Late Mohd. Hasim, W/o Munna Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathpur, Distt. - Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
8 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Collector, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
Date of Hearing : 27.3.2026
Date of Pronouncement : 29.4.2026
| For Appellants | : Mr. Sushil Dueby, Advocate along with Mr. Aman Upadhyay, Advocte |
| For Respondents No.1 & 2 | : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate |
| For State/Respondent No. 8 | : Mr. Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer |
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
CAV Judgment
1) This second appeal has been preferred by the appellants/ defendants No. 6 and 7 under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree passed by the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, District Sarguja in First Civil Appeal No. 37-A/2002 dated 1.9.2003, whereby the appeal preferred by the defendants No. 6 and 7 was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Class-I, Ramanujganj in Civil Suit No. 41-A/2000 dated 22.3.2002 were affirmed.
2) This second appeal was admitted for hearing vide order dated 23.12.2004 on following substantial questions of law :-
1. Whether the Courts below committed and error of law in holding that the document (Ex. P/1) an unregistered sale-deed confers any title upon plaintiff?
2. Whether the correct test in relation to perfection of title by way of adverse possession has not been applied by the Courts below and the finding is perverse on the face of record ?
3. Whether the lower appellate Court was obliged under the law to make an enquiry in relation to valid service of summons upon defendant No. 6 & 7 in the present facts and circumstances of the case.
3) The learned Counsel appearing for the appellants does not want to press substantial question of law no. 3. The prayer is accordingly allowed. This appeal is confined to substantial question of law no. 1 and 2 only.
4) The plaintiffs namely Mohd. Kasim and Mohd. Yasin instituted a civil suit claiming therein relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction over the suit property described in Schedule-A appended to the plaint inter-alia on the ground that suit property was sold by one Mohd. Rafique, who was the father of defendants No. 1 and 2 and husband of defendant No. 3 through un-registered sale-deed dated 15.4.1964 (Ex. P/1) and possession was handed over to plaintiffs and defendant No. 5, namely, Mohd. Hasim. They pleaded that defendants No. 1 to 3 executed a registered sale-deed of the suit property in favor of defendants No. 6 and 7 namely Ramjanak and Manikchand on 19.9.2000. They further pleaded that sale-deed dated 19.9.2000 does not contain signature of defendant No. 2 and same is forged one. They further pleaded that suit property was sold to them through un-registered sale-deed dated 15.4.1964 in consideration of Rs. 150/- and a sewing machine on stamp paper of 10 paise and since then, the plaintiffs are in possession. Plaintiffs also pleaded that revenue record has already been rectified pursuant to sale-deed dated 15.4.1964 and they have raised construction of a house over it. Plaintiffs took plea of adverse possession making statement that they are in continuous and hostile possession over the suit property since date of purchase and this fact was within the knowledge of defendants No. 1 to 3 and thus they have perfected their right over the suit property. Plaintiffs alleged the subsequent mutation of suit property in favor of defendants No. 1 to 3 and they sought for reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction against defendants No. 1 to 3, 4, 6 and 7.
5) Defendants No. 1 to 4 filed written statement and denied the plaint averments. They alleged un-registered sale-deed dated 15.4.1964 and pleaded that sale-deed dated 19.9.2000 was executed pursuant to power-of-attorney given by Shammad Ali. They further pleaded that pursuant to said sale-deed, possession has already been handed over to defendants No. 6 and 7. They also pleaded that suit property was purchased by Mohd. Rafique in the year 1961 in sale consideration of Rs. 200/- and his name was entered in revenue record vide order dated 27.8.1961. They stated that Mohd. Rafique remained in possession of suit property during his lifetime, and after his death names of his children and wife i.e. defendants No. 1 to 3 were entered in revenue record.
6) Defendants No. 6 and 7 (appellants herein) were proceeded ex-parte. Learned trial court framed issues and decreed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 22.3.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
