NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J. - (1.)This First Appeal under Sec. 96 of Civil Procedure Code, has been filed by the appellants/State against the judgment and decree dtd. 3/3/2006 passed by 5th Additional District Judge, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari in Civil Suit No. 6-B/2004, by which the suit filed by the plaintiffs has been decreed and the trial Court had directed the defendants No. 1 and 2 to pay Rs.51,000.00 as compensation towards loss sustained by the plaintiff on account of negligence committed by the defendants.
(2.)For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status shown in Civil Suit No. 6-B 2004.
(3.)The plaint averments in brief are that plaintiffs have filed the Civil Suit before the trial Court on 20/9/2000 mainly contending that the plaintiffs are the farmers and title holders of the suit property situated at village Piperchhedi, P.H. No. 41, Tahsil and District Dhamtari. The plaintiffs are in possession of 20 acres of land in which khasra No. 230, area 4.11 hectares which will be treated as suit property. According to the plaintiffs, the suit land is an agricultural land which yielded two crops every year providing 120 bags of paddy and also getting paddy of Rs.3000.00. It is further contended that the plaintiffs started growing Kharif crops and sowed varieties of rice RI 36 seeds in the agricultural land. While the paddy crop was ripe for harvesting, all of a sudden, the defendant No. 5 to 9 have decided to fillup the pond of village Piperchhedi through the canal in the first week of May 2000. The plaintiffs have requested them not to flow water in his field otherwise standing crops will be destroyed. It is further contended that the plaintiffs have sought one week time for harvesting the standing crops but the defendant No. 5 to 9 did not consider the request made by the plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff made a representation before Collector Dhamtari on 9/5/2000 to make an alternative arrangement for filling up the pond. The Collector, Dhamtari directed respondent No.2 to inspect the spot and submit his report. On 9/5/2000 Sub Engineer inspected the spot and suggested for alternative arrangement but the defendant No. 5 to 7 have made a complaint before police on 11/5/2000 alleging that the plaintiffs are stopping the flow of water from canal. Subsequently, defendant No. 5 to 9 have forcefully flown the water in the agricultural field of plaintiffs which caused loss to him of 120 bags of paddy and husk of Rs.3000.00 total valued at Rs.48,000.00 due to act of the defendants, the plaintiff has suffered financial loss. It is further contended that before filing of the suit, he has issued notice to the defendants on 1/7/2000 but no loss was repaid to him, on the basis of the aforesaid pleading, the plaintiffs have prayed that defendants be kindly directed to pay Rs.51,000.00 as compensation jointly and severally along with interest for the loss sustained by him on account of negligence of defendants.