IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL FIRST APPEAL NO.918 OF 2006 BETWEEN:-

VIJENDRA SINGH YADAV, SON OF LATE D.S. YADAV, AGED 54 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, R/O E-7-

730, ARERA COLONY, BHOPAL.

.....APPELLANT (BY SHRI ANKIT SAXENA - ADVOCATE)

AND LIEUT. COL. MAHENDRA SINGH YADAV, SONO F LATE D.S. YADAV, AGED 50 YEARS, R/O A-17, MACHNA COLONY, NEW BUS STOP NO.5, BHOPAL ....RESPONDENT (SHRI AMIT KHATRI - ADVOCATE )

…………………………………………………………………………………….

Reserved on : 05.07.2023 Pronounced on : 19.07.2023 This appeal having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming on for pronouncement this day, the Court pronounced the following:

JUDGMENT

This first appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2006 passed by Additional Judge to the Court of 10^th Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Bhopal in civil suit no.47-A/2005, whereby appellant/plaintiff’s suit for declaration of title and joint possession over ½ share and permanent injunction has been dismissed filed in respect of plot no.132-C, situated in Scheme no.13, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal.

2. The plaintiff filed the suit with the averments that the suit plot was developed by the Bhopal Development Authority (in short ‘the BDA’). In the year 1980, the plaintiff/appellant was engaged in the business but the defendant/respondent though completed M.B.B.S., was doing house job and was getting only stipend. Father of the parties namely Shri Datar Singh (D.S. Yadav) got the suit plot allotted in the name of Shri Munnasingh vide order dated 22.05.1980 (Ex.P/1) by the BDA and in pursuance thereof, a sum of Rs.2000/- and Rs.8348/- was paid to the BDA vide receipt dated 16.05.1980 & 31.05.1980 (Ex. P/2 & P/3) by father Shri D.S. Yadav as well the plaintiff. Father was Karta of joint Hindu family and was in Government Service. Smt. Raj Kumari is mother of the parties and her brother’s son Munna Singh was also living with the family.

Thereafter, on 05.08.1980, upon application of Munna Singh, who had no source of income and as per letter dated 19.08.1980 (Ex.P/4) the name of respondent was also jointly recorded and later on lease deed (Ex.P/5) was also executed on 18.06.1982 in their joint names. Since the amount was paid by Shri D.S.Yadav and the plaintiff, hence Shri Munna Singh after obtaining permission from the BDA vide (Ex.P/6) executed the deed relinquishing his rights in the plot in favour of the respondent without any consideration, as mentioned in the said deed dated 15.10.1984 (Ex.P/7) and as a consequence name of Shri Munna Singh was deleted. The suit property was always treated as property of the family and a panch faisla (Ex.P/9) was reduced in writing on 06.11.1996 with consent of plaintiff and defendant, acknowledging the said plot to be their joint property. All these documents were given to the plaintiff by the father, who expired on 06.04.1998. On coming to know that the respondent has declined to follow the terms of panch faisla and is claiming himself to be exclusive owner of the plot, the plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration of title and joint possession over ½ share and permanent injunction.

3. The respondent/defendant appeared and filed written statement claiming himself to be exclusive owner of the plot, however admitted execution of the panch faisla dated 06.11.1996 (Ex.P/9) but denied that funds were provided by the father or the plaintiff. It is also contended that as the plaintiff had threatened to commit suicide, in case he is not given half share in the suit plot, the deed (Ex.P/9) was got executed by the father, who later on had given him a writing dated 21.11.1996 (Ex.D/1) disagreeing the panch faisla (Ex.P/9). It is also contended that in the year 1980 he was M.B.B.S. and was earning and the plot was acquired by him out of his own earnings and not by the funds allegedly provided by the father and the plaintiff. On inter alia contentions the suit was prayed to be