Arun Mishra, J. - (1.) The question involved in the appeal is whether the land recorded in the revenue papers before the date of vesting as 'Grass " land can be treated as khud ?kasht land of Ex ?Zamindar.
(2.) The suit was filed by the plaintiffs/ respondents, as the successor of the Ex ?Zamindar. At the time of the abolition of Zamindari, it was recorded as 'Grass "land, in the name of their predecessor. They prayed for declaration of Bhumiswami rights and permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from interfering in their possession of the land comprised in Survey Nos.77, 83, 191, 195 and 799 corresponding to new Survey Nos.37, 103 and 460 total area 83 Bighas 4 Biswas situated in village Enchada, Tehsil Nateran, District Vidisha in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The defendant - State of Madhya Pradesh treated plaintiffs/respondents as encroacher of agricultural land, and they were threatened with dispossession on 1.5.1980 and 12.10.1980, whereas they have acquired the rights of Bhumiswami under provisions contained in Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code as they became Pacca tenant on the abolition of Zamindari. The plaintiffs/ respondents claimed that the land was Khud ?kasht land of their predecessors; Nirbhay Singh and Pratap Singh who were Zamindars of Village Enchada.
(3.) The State Government in the written statement denied the plaint averments. However, it was admitted that Nirbhay Singh and Pratap Singh, the predecessors were the Zamindars of the village Enchada. The land was not a Khud ?kasht land. It was recorded as 'Bir,' i.e., 'Grass' land before coming into force of the M.B. Zamindari Abolition Act.;