IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI

th

ON THE 29 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. APPEAL No. 3912 of 2010 VISHWANATH DUTT MISHRA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. SMT. UMA DEVI THROUGH LRS. OM PRAKASH AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Mr. Sanjay Agarwal - Senior Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Shrivastava, Mr.

Siddhant Kochar and Mr. U.N. Pandey - Advocates for appellants.

Ms. Samta Jain - Govt. Advocate for respondents/State.

ORDER The present miscellaneous appeal has been preferred under the provisions of Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure taking exception to the judgment and decree dated 10/08/1994 passed in Civil Appeal No.17 A of 1992 by learned Third Additional Judge to the court of District Judge, Satna whereby the judgment and decree dated 17/07/1991 passed in Civil Suit No.176A of 1989 has been reversed. Vide judgment and decree dated 17/07/1991 the suit of the original plaintiff (appellants herein)

has been decreed.

2. For the sake of brevity /convenience, the parties shall be referred by their rank in the trial court.

3. The facts of the case reveal that Late Shri Ramswaroop Jyotishi was the head of the family of the appellants. The ex-ruler of erstwhile Rewa State, vide allotment dated 23/09/1946 has allotted a plot admeasuring 225’

X 125” situated at Khasra No. 141 and 144 of Satna Town at village Bamhan Gawan (hereinafter referred to as “questioned property”). After the allotment, Shri Ramswaroop Jyotishi has duly taken the possession of the plot and started using the same. The name of Shri Ramswaroop has been duly enrolled in the Municipal records and he has also started paying the taxes to the Municipal Authorities. Shri Ramswaroop has taken construction permission from the Municipal Committee and raised construction thereupon. After the completion of the construction, a portion has been let out and a portion of the building was kept in actual physical possession. In the year 1966, Shri Ramswaroop Jyotishi expired leaving behind his son Shri Vishwanath Dutt Mishra to take care of his estate including the questioned property. Subsequently, the name of Vishwanath Dutt Mishra has been enrolled in place of his father in the Municipal records.

4. Vishwanath Dutt Mishra remains in peaceful possession of the said questioned property till 01/10/1985 when the Collector, Satna has declared the questioned property as government land, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellant. An appeal to this order of declaring the government land, has been preferred but the same was dismissed. A notice dated 24/09/1986, under the provisions of Section 80 of the CPC, was issued by the appellant to the Municipal Committee before initiating suit. A suit claiming declaration of title over the questioned property and permanent injunction has been instituted against the Municipal Committee and also challenging the order dated 01/10/1985 passed by Collector as nullity. Along with the plaint, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC was also filed. The application was kept on pending for certain period and was decided vide order dated 18/09/1989 in favour of the appellant restraining the respondents from interfering into the possession of the plaintiff. While passing the interim order of temporary injunction, the learned trial court has observed that the suit was instituted in the year 1986-87 and till date the written statement of the defendant has not been filed and therefore the case was fixed for 24/10/1989 for filing written statement, positively. The written statement was not filed up to a long period of time. Many dates passed on at the same stage of filing written statement and on 10/11/1990 also the date was fixed for filing written statement but no one on behalf of the defendant, has caused appearance and therefore the trial court had no option left but to proceed ex-parte in the suit. The learned trial court has fixed 10/01/1991 for ex-parte eviden