Sanjay K.Agrawal,J. - (1.) This appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial question of law: - "Whether the findings arrived at by the lower appellate court in reversing the well reasoned order of the trial court is contrary to the evidence that has come on record?" (For the sake of convenience, parties would be referred hereinafter as per their status shown in the plaint before the trial Court.)
(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title that he is owner of the schedule land shown in Schedule B attached with the plaint and the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 8-3-1994 reverting the land in favour of defendants No.1 to 3 - legal representatives of Madhuva, and further the order of the Collector affirming the order of the SDO dated 8-3-1994 are unsustainable and bad in law and are beyond jurisdiction, as they have purchased the suit land by registered sale deeds dated 2-3-1962 (Ex.P-1) and 30-1-1961 (Ex.P-2).
(3.) Defendants No.1 to 3 by filing written statement controverted the facts mentioned in the plaint stating inter alia that it was a Benami transaction and it does not confer any title to the plaintiff and the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred under Section 257(l-1) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, 'the Code') in case arising under Section 170-B of the Code.;