CHHOTELAL SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants were defendant No.3 to 6 before the trial Court and they had filed a counter claim in the civil suit. The counter claim of the appellants was dismissed by the trial Court. Thereafter, they had preferred an appeal before the appellate Court bearing No.63A/14. Appellate Court has affirmed the finding of the trial Court and had dismissed the appeal.

(2.) Learned trial Court as well as appellate Court has found that there is no illegality in the order passed by Tehsildar dated 16.05.1967. Patta has validly been allotted to respondent No.1 and 2 by Tehsildar.

(3.) Appellants who were defendants No.3 to 6 before the trial Court has stated that suit land were under possession of Thakurdeen and their father. Due to long possession Thakurdeen has earned the interest over half part of suit land and over half of suit land Parasnath was having interest. There was possession of Thakurdeen, Chhotelal, Parasnath and Ramkhelawan over the suit property. Defendant No.6 Surendra Prasad Shukla and defendant No.3 to 5 has stated that land in question is reserved forest land and settlement dated 16.05.1967 is illegal. Appellate Court has specifically held that there is circular of the State Government of Revenue Department dated 03.10.2012 which lays down that such lands over which Revenue Department has granted lease before 05.10.1980 then such lease holders will not be dispossessed from their land and therefore respondent No.1 and 2 could not be dispossessed and lease which has been granted in favour of respondent No.1 and 2 is legal. Though, defendants/appellants had made pleading that they are owner of the half of the land in question and thus entitled to get half compensation amount. But appellants - defendant Nos.3 to 6 was unable to prove that defendant No.3 to 6 got interest over the land in question. They were unable to show any document of title in their favour. Respondent No.1 and 2 has filed settlement order of Tehsildar dated 16.05.1967.