IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA st ON THE 21 OF JULY, 2025 SECOND APPEAL No. 245 of 2015 RAMESH CHAND SHIVHARE AND ANOTHER Versus BHAROSILAL SHIVHARE (DEAD) THR. LRS ASHOK SHIVHARE AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Vikas Singhal, Advocate for the appellants.

Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 3.

JUDGMENT

Before considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court would like to mention that in respect of the same property Bharosilal Shivhare had filed Civil Suit No. 7A/2008 against Suresh Chand Shivhare (appellant No. 2 in present appeal) and Civil Suit No. 8A/2008 against Ramesh Chand Shivhare (appellant No. 1 in present appeal) for eviction from the suit premises. Similarly, appellants had filed Civil Suit No. 6A/08 against Bharosilal Shivhare for declaration of title. All the three civil suits Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND were consolidated and decided by II Civil Judge Class I, Morena and by common judgment and decree dated 31/7/2008, Civil Suit Nos. 7A/2008 and 8A/2008 which were filed by Bharosilal for eviction were dismissed. So far as Civil Suit No. 6A of 2008 filed by appellants is concerned, the same was returned back on the ground that the suit was not properly valued and the trial court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the same.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the trial court in Civil Suit Nos. 7A/2008 and 8A/2008, Bharosilal Shivhare filed Civil Appeal Nos. 11A/2014 and 12A/2014 respectively. Similarly, appellants filed Civil Appeal Nos. 9A/2014 and 10A/2014. Civil Appeal No. 9A/2014 was filed by the appellants against rejection of their plaint, whereas Civil Appeal No. 10A/2014 was filed by them against the findings recorded by the trial court. All the civil appeals were consolidated and have been decided by common judgment and decree dated 7/5/2015 passed by IV Additional District Judge, Morena. Civil Appeal Nos. 11A/2014 and 12A/2014 filed by Bharosilal were dismissed, whereas Civil Appeal Nos. 9A/2014 and 10A/2014 filed by appellants were partially allowed and it was directed that the appellants shall not be dispossessed without following due process of law and till then the defendant shall not interfere with the possession of the appellants either by himself or through his agents.

3. Although in the cause title of this Second Appeal it is mentioned that this appeal is being filed against judgment and decree passed by the appellate court in Civil Appeal Nos. 9A/2014, 10A/2014, 11A/2014, and 12A/2014, but in fact this appeal is against the judgment and decree passed by the appellate court in Civil Appeal Nos. 9A/2014 and 10A/2014 Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND

4. Facts necessary for disposal of present appeal, in short, are that appellants and Bharosilal / original defendant are real brothers. As Bharose Lal died during the pendency of Civil Appeal, therefore his legal heirs were brought on record and this second appeal is being contested by the legal heirs of Bharosilal. Appellants filed a civil suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction on the ground that Kunjilal was the father of appellants and original defendant, who has already expired. The details of the house in dispute were mentioned in Paragraph 2 of the plaint. It is the case of appellants that the aforesaid house was purchased by Kunjilal from earlier owner Ochha by registered sale deed dated 25.01.1993 in the name of defendant. However, it was claimed that the appellants as well as Puniya Bai had 1/4 share in the property and in equal proportion plaintiffs, defendant as well as Puniya Bai had spent their money for repair and renovation of the house. Defendant by registered sale deed dated 5.11.1969 alienated 1/4 share in the property to his mother Puniya Bai. Thus after the share was alienated by defendant No. 1, Puniya Bai became owner of 1/2 share in the house whereas plaintiffs had 1/4 share each in the said