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

Sevak Ram (Dead) Through Lrs.,(DECEASED) – Appellant
Versus
Dwij Bai And Ors – Respondent
SA 170/2015



Advocates:
['SHIKHAR SHARMA', '', 'RAGHVENDRA PRADHAN', 'A G', '', 'ADITYA CHOPRA', 'SHUBHANK TIWARI', 'Ishwari Ghritlahare', 'ANSHUMAN SHRIVASTAVA', 'VIVEK MISHRA', 'RAKESH KUMAR KASHYAP']

Page 1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Second Appeal No. 170 of 2015

Judgment Reserved on 01.04.2022

Judgment Delivered on 14.06.2022

1. Sevak Ram (since deceased) through legal heirs :-

1a.Smt. Sevati widow of late Sevak Ram, aged about 42 years,

1b.Virendra, son of late Sevak Ram, aged about 24 years,

1c.Gokul Sahu, son of Late Sevak Ram, aged about 20 years.

All are R/o. Village Chaitara, Tahsil Rajim, District Gariyaband

(C.G.) .

1d. Minaksi Bai Sahu, D/o. Late Sevak Ram, wife of Shri Gumar Sahu,

aged about 22 years, R/o. Village Patewa, P.S. Gobara, Nayapara,

Tahsil Nayapara, District Raipur (C.G.).

2. Kodu Ram, son of Salik Ram Sahu, aged about 47 years,

3. Kodan Ram, son of Salik Ram Sahu, aged about 45 years,

All are R/o. Village Chaitara, P.H. No. 12/09, Tahsil Rajim, District

Raipur (Now Gariyaband) (C.G.).

---- Appellants/Defendants

Versus

1. Dwij Bai, aged about 45 years, D/o Salik Ram Sahu, wife of Devlal

Sahu, at Present R/o Village Chaitara, P.H. No. 12/09, Tahsil Rajim,

District Raipur (Now Gariyaband) (C.G.)

2. Lachhavantin Bai, D/o Salik Ram Sahu, at present R/o. Village

Parteva, Tahsil Rajim, District Raipur (Now Gariyaband) (C.G.)

(Plaintiffs)

3. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Collector, District Raipur (Now

Gariyaband) (C.G.)

(Defendant No. 5)

---- Respondents

For Appellants

: Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Advocate &

Ms. Ishwari Ghritlahre, Advocate.

For State/Res. No. 3 : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nande, P. L.

Page 2

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

CAV Judgment

1. This is defendants' Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of

CPC against the judgment and decree dated 15.01.2015,

passed by Additional District Judge, Gariaband, in Civil Appeal

No.21-A/2010 partly allowing the judgment and decree dated

09.01.2009 passed by Second Civil Judge, Class-II, Rajim in

Civil Suit No. 57-A/2008, by which, the plaintiff's suit has been

decreed.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties would be referred to as per

their description shown in the plaint filed before the trial Court.

3. Instant appeal has been admitted by this Court on 10.07.2015 on

the following substantial question of law:-

“ Whether the findings of the First Appellate Court by

holding the share of respondents No. 1 & 2 to the extent

of 1/6th & 1/6th of the suit property is perverse ?”

4. The brief facts of the case, as reflected from the record are that,

Plaintiffs/respondents No. 1 & 2 have instituted Civil Suit before

2nd Civil Judge, Class-II, Rajim, Raipur for declaration of title,

partition and for possession mainly contending that the plaintiffs

and defendants are Hindus and they are governed by Hindu

Succession Act, 1956 and genealogy of the family was also

described in the plaint. It has been contended that plaintiffs and

defendants No. 1 to 3 are real sisters and brothers, respectively

whereas defendant No. 4 is widow of late Shri Salik Ram Sahu

and mother of plaintiffs and defendants No. 1 to 3, who are legal

heirs of Late Salik Ram Sahu. Salik Ram Sahu was having

agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 14, area 4.22 hectare (in

total) situated at village Chaitra, Patwari Circle No. 12, Rajasva

Nigam Mandal and Tehsil Rajim, District Raipur as per the details

given in paragraph 5 of the plaint. As per the plaintiffs, the

aforesaid property was the ancestral land of the defendants and

plaintiffs No. 1 & 2 which in subsequent paragraphs will be

referred to as suit land. It has been alleged that after the death of

Page 3

late Mr. Salik Ram Sahu, the defendants with intention to grab

the suit land, to deprive the plaintiffs fraudulently alienated the

suit land by partition it amongst themselves and recorded their

names in the revenue record, therefore, they have preferred an

appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Gariaband against the

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