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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 43171

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Munnalal – Appellant
Versus
Bade Singh – Respondent
SA 608/2019



Advocates:
Ashish Saraswat,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA st ON THE 21 OF NOVEMBER, 2024 SECOND APPEAL No. 608 of 2019 MUNNALAL AND OTHERS Versus BADE SINGH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Ashish Saraswat, Advocate for the appellants.

Shri Anand Vinod Bhardwaj appeared for respondents.

JUDGEMENT

This second appeal, under Section 100 of CPC, has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 6/12/2018 passed by III Additional Judge to the Court of I Additional District Judge, Morena, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 18/2018, as well as, judgment and decree dated 16/2/2018 passed by I Civil Judge Class I, Morena, in Civil Suit No. 3A/2015. By these judgments, the suit filed by the plaintiffs/appellants was dismissed by the trial court, and the civil appeal filed by plaintiffs was also dismissed.

2. Facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal, in short, are that appellants/plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction, as well as, for declaration of sale deeds dated 14/5/1979, 24/3/1992, 17/6/2011, 9/11/2010, 20/6/2011, and 6/7/2011 as null and void. It is the case of plaintiffs that plaintiffs are the sole owner and in Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND possession of a Hkou Hkwfe (residential plot) admeasuring 30x50 = 1500 square feet situated near New Sabji Mandi, Madhopura, Old Ward No. 15/New Ward No. 38 in Morena, which is part of Survey No. 2156. Grandfather of appellants/plaintiffs, namely Ochha, had purchased the disputed land from Gyasi Ram and Pancham Singh, sons of Hariprasad, by a registered sale deed on 7/5/1979 after making the entire payment of consideration. The name of the grandfather of the plaintiffs was also mutated in the revenue records. After the death of Ochha, the property was transferred in the name of Faddiram, father of plaintiffs. Grandmother of plaintiffs Sonabai died on 7/9/1983, father of plaintiffs Faddiram died on 20/1/1997, and mother of plaintiffs Baijanti died on 20/9/2001. After death of parents of plaintiffs, plaintiffs inherited the property and their names were also mutated in the revenue records.

3. The family tree as per the plaint is as follows:

Ochha (Died on 12/5/79)

| |

----------------------------------------------------

| |

Sonabai (died on 7/9/83) Faddiram (died on 20/1/97)

|

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | | | |

Smt. Baijanti Munnalal Buddharam Rakesh Rajabeti (Wife died-20.9.01) (Son) (Son) (Son) (Daughter) 4. It is the case of appellants/plaintiffs that grandfather of the appellants had stayed in a hut situated on the disputed land. The plaintiffs are residing in a house situated in front of the disputed land. The land in dispute is being used by the plaintiffs for residential purposes, tying cattle, Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND and storing goods. On 1/12/2011, son of defendant No. 8 and nephew of defendant No. 7 namely Rajesh Parmar along with four other anti-social elements, came to the spot and started measuring the land. When plaintiffs tried to stop them, they did not agree and claimed that they would forcibly raise construction over the disputed land. They abused the plaintiffs/appellants and although appellants had shown documents of title, still they did not agree. Apprehending a dispute son of defendant no.8 and Rajesh Parmar unloaded stones, which they had brought in a trolley, by the side of disputed land and left the spot threatening to start construction soon. On 3/12/2011, they again came with culprits and tried to construct the foundation. When plaintiffs tried to stop them, they were beaten by Lathis, kicks and fists. Plaintiffs lodged an FIR and filed Civil Suit No. 83/2011 for declaration of title and permanent injunction. The trial court, by order dated 16/12/2011, directed the parties to maintain status quo. At that time plaintiffs came to know about execution of sale deeds dated 14/5/1979, 24/3/1992, 17/6/2011, 9/11/2010, 20/6/2011, a

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top