KALI Vs. RAMADHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment-decree dated 3-7-89, passed by II ADJ, Rewa in C. A. No. 22-A/82, reversing the judgment-decree dated 29-9-81, passed by IV Civil Judge Class II, Rewa in C. S. No. 123-A/80, defendant/appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 100, CPC.

(2.) THE appeal has been heard on the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) LATE Hirdan had two wives. Ram Pyare @ Pyare and defendant Late Ram Nihore respectively were sons from first and second wives. Late Hirdan in his life time settled agricultural lands separately in the name of Late Pyare and Late Ram Nihore. Suit land Khasra No. 1001 (new No. 1001/1, 1001/2) area 1. 75 acre, Village Amiliha, Tehsil Hujur, District Rewa was recorded in the name of Late Pyare and he alone remained in its exclusive possession till Miti Ashad Wadi 14 Samvat 2001 corresponding to the year 1944. Late Pyare sold the suit land in the year 1944 to the plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar for a sum of Rs. 70/- by executing an unregistered sale deed (Ex. P-3) and the plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar was accordingly placed in possession. Receipt of payment of Rs. 70/- (Ex. P-4) was also executed by Late Pyare. Since then plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar remained in possession of the suit land. Late Pyare died in July, 1956. Defendant late Ram Nihore driven away the widow of Late Pyare and forcibly obtained possession of property left by Late Pyare sometime in the year 1971 in clandestine manner got mutated his name in the revenue record in respect of the suit land Khasra No. 1001 area 1. 75 acres. Thereafter, defendant Late Ram Nihore and defendant/appellants who arc his legal heirs threatened plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar to dispossess him from the suit land, therefore, the plaintiff/respondent instituted C. S. No. 123-A/80 before the IV Civil Judge Class II, Rewa for declaration of title and injunction restraining defendant/appellants from interfering his possession of suit land. The suit has been resisted by the defendant/applicants stating inter alia that Late Ram Pyare @ Pyare and Late Ram Nihore were sons of Late Hirdan from first and second wives respectively, however, they remained joint. Late Ram Pyare was Manager of the joint family and on his death, name of defendant Late Ram Nihore was mutated in the revenue record. The suit land was never sold by Pyare to plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar in the year 1944 for a sum of Rs. 70/ -. Plaintiff/respondent Ramadhar never remained in possession of the suit land. However, he got recorded his name in the revenue Khasra since 1956. Defendant Late Ram Nihore, therefore, filed application before the revenue authority for correction of revenue entries and the application was allowed. The Civil Judge in C. S. No. 123-A/80 vide judgment dated 3-7-89 held that unregistered sale deed (Ex. P-3) and the receipt of payment (Ex. P-4) since were not proved, the plaintiff/respondent can not be said to be in possession of the suit land. Accordingly, accepting that defendant/appellants remained in possession of the suit land, C. S. No. 123-A/80 for declaration and injunction filed by plaintiff/respondent has been dismissed.