Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) The present second appeal has been preferred by the appellant Smt. Sutto, against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.03.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, Unnao in First Appeal No.148 of 1979 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 20.11.1979 passed by the learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No.164 of 1978 filed by the appellant was set aside.
(2.) There was earlier litigation between the same parties with respect to the same property. The earlier suit was filed by the respondent for a decree of possession against the appellant in respect of the same property which is the subject matter of the present appeal. In the plaint filed by the respondent, the boundaries of the properties were shown as:- East- Public through fare West- Tank North- House of Nakani South- House of Durga and Hannu
(3.) The respondent claimed that he is the absolute owner of the entire property on the basis of sale deed dated 15.10.1971 which was executed for a sum of Rs.950/- by Dabru, brother of the appellant. The claim of the appellant in the earlier suit was that her father gifted the open land to her on which she constructed the disputed house by her own funds and she was living in that house and the sale deed could not have been executed in respect of the said property in favour of the respondent herein. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:- "(i) Whether the plaintiff is owner of a part of the house in question on the basis of succession being the legal heir of his deceased father? (ii) Whether the defendant unauthorizedly or forcibly has taken possession of the property in question? if yes, then whether he is liable to be evicted. (iii) Whether the judgment and order dated 30.05.1977 passed in Suit No.270 of 1972: Dabru vs Smt. Sutto by the Court of Ist Additional Munsif, Unnao in respect of the ownership of the defendant of the disputed property would be treated as final? if yes then its effect (iv) Whether the defendant is owner of property in question on the basis of sale deed dated 15.10.1971 executed by Dabru in his favour? (v) Whether the plaintiff had accepted the ownership of the defendant and the earlier suit No.270 of 1972: Dabru versus Smt. Sutto? If yes, then its effect (vi) What relief the plaintiff is entitled to?";