SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

M.A.No. 120 OF 2015

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA

ON THE 5th OF APRIL 2022.

MISC. APPEAL NO. 120 of 2015.

Between:-

1.

SATISHCHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 60

YEARS, S/O LATE RATANCHAND JAIN.

2.

CHAKRESH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

S/O LATE RATANCHAND JAIN

BOTH R/O SANJAY WARD NO. 11,

NEAR SANJAY CHOURAHA TEHSIL-

PATHARIYA, DISTRICT DAMOH (M.P.).

(APPELLANTS)

(BY SHRI (Dr.) ANUVAD SHRIVASTAVA, ADVOCATE)

AND

GUDDAN @ DASHRATH, AGED ABOUT

34 YEARS, S/O MAHADEV PRASAD

CHOURASIYA, R/O SANJAY CHOURAHA,

TEHSIL PATHARIA, DISTRICT DAMOH,

(M.P.)

(RESPONDENT)

(BY SHRI SHASHANK PANDEY, ADVOCATE)

This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the

following:

M.A.No. 120 OF 2015

2

Advocates:
Anuvad Shrivastava,

With the consent of both the parties, this case has been heard and

decided finally.

1.

Appellants/plaintiffs have filed this miscellaneous civil appeal under

order 43 Rule 1(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, being aggrieved

and dissatisfied with the order dated 19/12/14 passed by the Additional

District Judge to the court of First Additional District Judge, Damoh in civil

Appeal no. 1-A/2014, whereby and whereunder the First Appellate Court set

aside the judgment and decree dated 18/12/13 passed by Civil Judge Class 2,

Pathariya, District- Damoh in civil suit no.32 A/2011 and remanded the

matter back to the learned trial Judge.

2.

The appellants /plaintiffs filed the suit before the trial court stating that

they have purchased the land, survey number 6/1 area 0.14 dismil on

12/01/62 situated in Pathariya Distt. Damoh from Pt Santosh Kumar Hajari

by a registered sale deed. Out of which plaintiff's house is built on 10 dismil

land. 4x20 square feet out of remaining 04 dismil unoccupied land of the

plaintiffs was taken by defendant on monthly rent of Rs 500 for the purpose

of running a shop. The defendant is in default of payment of 27 months rent

3

from January 2006 to 31/03/2008. Total Rs. 15,500/- is to be paid by the

respondent to the appellants.

3.

Despite the registered notice dated 01/02/08 served by plaintiffs to the

defendant to vacate the land and payment of the arrears of rent, the defendant

neither made the payment of arrears nor did he pass the vacant possession of

land to the plaintiffs, therefore plaintiffs brought the present suit against the

defendant for his eviction and recovery of arrears of rent.

4.

In written statement Respondent/defendant denied the facts of tenancy

and alleged that there lies no relationship of landlord and tenant between him

and the appellants with respect to the suit land. The notice dated 01/02/08

served by appellants to the respondent is illegal. Janpad panchayat is the

owner of the suit land. Defendant has been regularly paying the rent to the

Janpad panchayat, therefore respondent is the tenant of Janpad Panchayat.

Appellants want to take possession of the suit land from the respondent

forcefully. Appellants are not entitled to get possession of the suit land and

the suit is liable to be dismissed.

5.

The trial court framed five issues and after recording evidence of both

the parties, reached to the conclusion that the relationship of landlord and

tenant between the plaintiffs and defendant is not established but the trial

court has found proved that the plaintiffs are the owner of the suit land and

4

the possession of the respondent on the suit land amounts to encroachment,

therefore the plaintiffs are entitled to get vacant possession of suit land and

directed to the respondent to deliver the possession of suit land to the

appellants immediately, Accordingly the trial court has partly decreed the

suit.

6.

The respondent/ defendant has filed civil appeal before the appellate

Court which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 1-A/2014 challenging the

Judgment of the trial court on various grounds. The Lower Appellate Court

vide order dated 19/12/14 has remanded the matter to the trial Court, inter

alia with the following directions;

1. The trial court to direct the appellant/plaintiff to claim for

declaration of title. After the proper valuation of the suit,court fee be

paid accordingly.

2. Trial court also to direct that the Janpad Panchayat be made party

to the suit for the more elucidation of the case.

3. Trial court to direct both the parties to get the spot inspection done

for the clarity of location of the suit land.

4. For the above purposes the trial court to direct the parties to submit

an application and after the completion of the above process, take the

evidence of the parties interested to give the same and dispose the case

on merit.

7.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned First

Appellate Court has failed to appreciate that the trial court has not decided

civil suit merely on pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top